Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Richard Fairhurst]

Clifford Snow wrote:
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add 
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going 
> to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding 
> tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload
> JOSM for the changed to be active.

Just an additional data point: I use tiger:reviewed extensively in
cycle.travel's mapping and routing to make sense of OSM in rural areas.

Bike routing generally prefers minor roads with fewer cars (residential,
unclassified, tertiary) and avoids major roads with many cars (primary,
trunk, motorway). Bike routers will usually try and maximise the use of
residential roads.

Because TIGER class A41 was imported as highway=residential, and much of A41
is dirt tracks or worse, applying these routing weightings to the US would
mean that the router seeks out what are often unrideable routes.
tiger:reviewed is a useful signifier that someone has actually looked at a
residential road and verified that it is a residential road as we understand
it in OSM. So, for the sake of us cyclists, please don't clear
tiger:reviewed if you haven't reviewed a road!

(In urban areas I do agree that tiger:reviewed is often now worthless.)

cheers
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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Clifford Snow]

Just to clarify, I'm not proposing a mechanical edit. I don't think it's
appropriate.

>From reading the responses, most people would prefer to keep the tag
tiger:reviewed. I respect it and will not ask for a change in JOSM.

Clifford






On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Wolfgang Zenker 
wrote:

> * Richard Welty  [180511 20:16]:
> > On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote:
> >> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove
> them
> >> all, everywhere.
>
> > i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer
> > that they
> > stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name,
> > connectivity, location, classification, surface.)
>
> same for me; loosing this tag would make it much harder for me to
> keep track of the roads I have already reviewed/fixed and which ones are
> still to do.
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Wolfgang Zenker]

* Richard Welty  [180511 20:16]:
> On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote:
>> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them 
>> all, everywhere.

> i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer
> that they
> stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name,
> connectivity, location, classification, surface.)

same for me; loosing this tag would make it much harder for me to
keep track of the roads I have already reviewed/fixed and which ones are
still to do.

Wolfgang

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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

The legacy of TIGER-tagging will persist in OSM for a long, long time.  That is 
the reality of the import we did, rough/sloppy data and all.  This legacy 
serves as many lessons to be learned regarding the practice(s) of wide-scale 
imports.  If it sounds like I'm saying "we made this bed, so now we must sleep 
in it," you are correct.  There are no easy solutions, though there may be 
better ones.

As TIGER data remain a dominant source of road/highway data in the US (plus 
MANY improvements), obfuscating their source in the guise of "cleaning up their 
history" does not help.  In fact, a wholesale deletion of tags different than 
we delete them now (and have) hinders the continuing clean-up/improvement of 
these data.  I elect to continue to clean up noisy/messy/sloppy TIGER data 
where/when/as I can.  When these data reach a state of "good enough that I 
would enter them into OSM" (as good OSM Contributors, we share such judgements) 
I remove the tiger_reviewed tag.  I support others who do so, too.  Largely 
speaking, this is how we'll "solve" this, although solving with smarter/better 
solutions is certainly welcome.

Slowly, slowly indeed, we clean up TIGER.  It will take years, it may take 
decades.  I 100% support talking about strategies (especially better ones) to 
do so, I support the chip-chip-chip away at messy data that need improving as 
we have since TIGER finished uploading.  However, wholesale deletion of tags, 
as doing so contradicts the workflow we have evolved, no, I do not abide that.  
Should we want to improve that workflow, I'm listening.  But (politely, 
Clifford) I reject that the tiger:reviewed tag has lost all meaning.

We can be more clever, we can be more zealous, but let's not be more blind.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Steve Friedl]

> I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed 
> it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up. 

I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object, I 
delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of to-do list.

I also delete tiger:reviewed=yes tags when otherwise editing an object.

Steve


From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:56 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it 
on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up. 

I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I personally 
wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag left that would 
indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified 
TIGER' roads.
--
  Martijn van Exel
  mailto:m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads 
has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in 
Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I 
picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the 
time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors 
making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of 
discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a 
good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to 
the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced 
Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload 
JOSM for the changed to be active.

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
[2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh

Clifford

-- 
@osm_seattle
http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
mailto: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] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Richard Welty]

On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote:
> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them 
> all, everywhere.
i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer
that they
stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name,
connectivity, location, classification, surface.)

richard

-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Doug Hembry]

One contrary view: I regret to say that there are still quite a few 
"tiger:reviewed=no" roads in my neck of the woods - the south San 
Francisco Bay area. I select the setting to highlight them in JOSM, and 
use it to remind myself to try to survey and fully tag them. Where 
possible I prefer to actually drive the road before removing the tag. 
Or, where impractical (like private roads), at least use imagery to 
adjust their alignment. If the tag wasn't there I'd pretty soon loose 
track of which roads needed attention.

So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them 
all, everywhere.

- Doug

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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Martijn van Exel]

Very true Mike. There is still some value in detecting TIGER roads that
are in 'original' state. For example, if you can detect a cluster of
'unmodified' TIGER roads, that would point to an area entirely untouched
by human editors.
I write 'original' and 'unmodified' in quotes, because a number of
bots have touched most TIGER imported ways, so TIGER ways having
version=1 are rare.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 11:44, Mike Thompson wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Martijn van Exel
>  wrote:>> __
>>  As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER
>>  as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified
>>  TIGER' roads.>> -
> Just because a TIGER road has been modified doesn't mean it has been
> verified, for example if you add a side street you will probably have
> to add a shared node at its intersection with the road in question,
> and that would bump the version - meaning it is now "modified" even
> though the mapper may not have reviewed the entire length of the TIGER
> road.  Conversely, just because a TIGER road is still at version 0,
> doesn't mean it hasn't been verified as existing nodes that make up
> the way can be moved without bumping the version on the way.> 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

>  As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER as
> the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
> -
>
Just because a TIGER road has been modified doesn't mean it has been
verified, for example if you add a side street you will probably have to
add a shared node at its intersection with the road in question, and that
would bump the version - meaning it is now "modified" even though the
mapper may not have reviewed the entire length of the TIGER road.
Conversely, just because a TIGER road is still at version 0, doesn't mean
it hasn't been verified as existing nodes that make up the way can be moved
without bumping the version on the way.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Clifford Snow]

Bryan,
There are members of the US community that object to using proprietary apps
such as Slack. I respect their opinion that I used the mailing list to get
a consensus.

I do enjoy Slack, but like forums, thread can be missed, especially as we
build the community on slack with more and more posts.

Hopefully this conversation will give us a clear consensus on tiger:reviewed

Clifford

Sent from my Android phone.

On Fri, May 11, 2018, 9:45 AM Bryan Housel  wrote:

> I agree it would be great to get rid of `tiger:reviewed`.
> I proposed this for iD 3 years ago but received some pushback:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2697
>
> I would be ok if it were removed via a mechanical edit.
>
> As an aside, I think it would be great to move to a GitHub/Slack based
> workflow for mechanical edits and imports so ideas like this don’t get
> lost.
> Even if the broader OSM community wants to keep their discussions on
> wiki/mailinglist, we can change what we do for US-scoped edits to work a
> bit more efficiently.
>
> Thanks Bryan
>
>
> On May 11, 2018, at 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow 
> wrote:
>
> The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER
> roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1]
> in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no.
> Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this
> tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical
> edit, but by editors making changes to roads.
>
> I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
> discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is
> a good idea.
>
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed
> to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced
> Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload
> JOSM for the changed to be active.
>
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
> [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh
>
> Clifford
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> ___
> 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] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Jack Burke]

I kinda object to any type of mechanical removal of this tag, mainly
because I do still use it.  I've modified JOSM's settings to show the
yellow highlight, and I periodically go on a TIGER editing spree,
especially in the county I live in.  It has been very valuable in finding
and fixing misnamed roads and other errors.

One of my main objections to a mechanical removal is that there are
numerous rural-area roads where the only edit I've done is to add the
county road number as a ref tag (often I will document these as a voice
note in OsmAnd as I drive past them on a higher-priority road).  I won't
necessarily have verified the road name, surface, or any other attributes
at the time.

--jack


On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:

> I was thinking about this some more. I do still actually use the visual
> cue (yellow) in JOSM to see which roads I want to double-check when editing
> in an area. I don't know if this is still enabled in JOSM by default but
> it's available as one of the default paint styles.
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:59, Steve Friedl wrote:
> > > I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has
> reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was
> brought up.
> >
> > I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object,
> > I delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of to-do
> > list.
> >
> > I also delete tiger:reviewed=yes tags when otherwise editing an object.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org]
> > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:56 AM
> > To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads
> >
> > I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has
> > reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that
> > was brought up.
> >
> > I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I
> > personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag
> > left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can
> > continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
> > --
> >   Martijn van Exel
> >   mailto:m...@rtijn.org
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
> > The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of
> > TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue
> > Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has
> > tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass
> > query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not
> > through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.
> >
> > I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
> > discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this
> > is a good idea.
> >
> > I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> > tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to
> > preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to
> > tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.
> >
> > [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
> > [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh
> >
> > Clifford
> >
> > --
> > @osm_seattle
> > http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> > OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > mailto: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
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Martijn van Exel]

I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has
reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that
was brought up.
I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I
personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag
left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can
continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
> The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of
> TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue
> Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has
> tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass
> query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it.
> Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.> 
> I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
> discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think
> this is a good idea.> 
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences-
> >Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable.
> Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.> 
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
> [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh
> 
> Clifford
> 
> -- 
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> _
> 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] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Mike N]

On 5/11/2018 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of 
discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this 
is a good idea.


I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add 
tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to 
preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to 
tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.



  I'm not quite convinced since there can still be local uses and 
conventions.  I used it to show that I confirmed a road's name and where 
it began and ended.   Others use it to mean full survey with all 
attributes and signage have been collected.  But since JOSM defaults not 
to show that flag visually, I've almost stopped updating it also.   So I 
have to agree that it is no longer as useful as it once was.


 And regarding other projects: where I was thinking of a local mass 
edit to confirm conguency and remove the flag after obtaining and 
following a process to get a county to contribute data to OSM, it 
wouldn't matter if the tiger:reviewed tag was present - I would still 
match OSM roads to new data and investigate any differences.


  Bottom line - no objection here though.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Bryan Housel]

I agree it would be great to get rid of `tiger:reviewed`. 
I proposed this for iD 3 years ago but received some pushback:  
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2697 


I would be ok if it were removed via a mechanical edit.

As an aside, I think it would be great to move to a GitHub/Slack based workflow 
for mechanical edits and imports so ideas like this don’t get lost.  
Even if the broader OSM community wants to keep their discussions on 
wiki/mailinglist, we can change what we do for US-scoped edits to work a bit 
more efficiently.
 
Thanks Bryan


> On May 11, 2018, at 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow  wrote:
> 
> The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER 
> roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] 
> in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. 
> Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag 
> all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but 
> by editors making changes to roads.
> 
> I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of 
> discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a 
> good idea.
> 
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to 
> the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced 
> Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload 
> JOSM for the changed to be active.
> 
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611 
> 
> [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh 
> 
> Clifford
> 
> -- 
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us 
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> ___
> 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

[Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Clifford Snow]

The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER
roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1]
in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no.
Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this
tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical
edit, but by editors making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is
a good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed
to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced
Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload
JOSM for the changed to be active.

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
[2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh

Clifford

-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us