Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Richard Fairhurst]

Marc Gemis wrote:

I wonder whether it is interesting to know the difference between
concrete, asphalt and pervious concrete. All three have different
characteristics whether it be comfort for the cyclist or being
dangerous under icy conditions or durability under heavy loaded
trucks. What do you think ? Is it worth recording those differences
for paved roads ?


Absolutely - it's certainly worth recording if you have the time and 
information. Similarly 'unpaved' is worth breaking down into dirt, 
gravel, fine_gravel etc.


But OSM is iterative - data gets better over time. So if you're trying 
to make a lot of changes fast, paved/unpaved is much better than 
nothing, and someone can come along and make it more detailed later. I 
generally tend to concentrate on the paved/unpaved split but I'm always 
delighted to see when people have done more detailed tagging.


cheers
Richard

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Rihards]

On 2017.07.17. 06:16, Marc Gemis wrote:
> I wonder whether it is interesting to know the difference between
> concrete, asphalt and pervious concrete. All three have different
> characteristics whether it be comfort for the cyclist or being
> dangerous under icy conditions or durability under heavy loaded
> trucks. What do you think ? Is it worth recording those differences
> for paved roads ?

concrete/asphalt definitely worth mapping separately. concrete types
might be the next level of detail, but harder to figure out from street
imagery.

> m.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Richard Fairhurst
>  wrote:
>> Kevin Kenny wrote:
>>> Fair enough. I will confess that I'm a little lackadaisical about
>>> tagging the surface on hard-surfaced roads. It appears that
>>> some sort of hard surface is more or less assumed by default.
>>> I do tag 'gravel', 'compacted', 'shale', 'sand', 'ground'
>>> assiduously, and usually add some sort of assessment of
>>> 'smoothness' on those.
>>
>> In that case you are absolutely on the side of the angels.
>>
>> Yes, if you clear the tiger:reviewed tag after reviewing that a residential
>> (or unclassified, or tertiary, or greater) road genuinely does have a paved
>> surface, that's AOK in my book - that's the assumed default for those
>> highway values in developed countries. I generally wouldn't add
>> surface=paved in such cases either.
>>
>> cheers
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: 
>> http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tiger-Zip-Data-Removal-Project-Update-tp5898958p5899343.html
>> Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> ___
>> 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
> 


-- 
 Rihards

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Marc Gemis]

I wonder whether it is interesting to know the difference between
concrete, asphalt and pervious concrete. All three have different
characteristics whether it be comfort for the cyclist or being
dangerous under icy conditions or durability under heavy loaded
trucks. What do you think ? Is it worth recording those differences
for paved roads ?

m.

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Richard Fairhurst
 wrote:
> Kevin Kenny wrote:
>> Fair enough. I will confess that I'm a little lackadaisical about
>> tagging the surface on hard-surfaced roads. It appears that
>> some sort of hard surface is more or less assumed by default.
>> I do tag 'gravel', 'compacted', 'shale', 'sand', 'ground'
>> assiduously, and usually add some sort of assessment of
>> 'smoothness' on those.
>
> In that case you are absolutely on the side of the angels.
>
> Yes, if you clear the tiger:reviewed tag after reviewing that a residential
> (or unclassified, or tertiary, or greater) road genuinely does have a paved
> surface, that's AOK in my book - that's the assumed default for those
> highway values in developed countries. I generally wouldn't add
> surface=paved in such cases either.
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tiger-Zip-Data-Removal-Project-Update-tp5898958p5899343.html
> Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> 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] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Richard Fairhurst]

Kevin Kenny wrote:
> Fair enough. I will confess that I'm a little lackadaisical about 
> tagging the surface on hard-surfaced roads. It appears that 
> some sort of hard surface is more or less assumed by default. 
> I do tag 'gravel', 'compacted', 'shale', 'sand', 'ground' 
> assiduously, and usually add some sort of assessment of 
> 'smoothness' on those.

In that case you are absolutely on the side of the angels.

Yes, if you clear the tiger:reviewed tag after reviewing that a residential
(or unclassified, or tertiary, or greater) road genuinely does have a paved
surface, that's AOK in my book - that's the assumed default for those
highway values in developed countries. I generally wouldn't add
surface=paved in such cases either.

cheers
Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tiger-Zip-Data-Removal-Project-Update-tp5898958p5899343.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Kevin Kenny]

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Richard Fairhurst
 wrote:
> Bryan Housel wrote:
>> We haven’t discussed automatic removal of any other tiger tags.
>> (I don’t have a strong opinion for either keeping or removing them.)
>
> I have a really strong opinion _against_ removing tiger:reviewed tags where
> the road type and surface have not been manually reviewed!

Fair enough. I will confess that I'm a little lackadaisical about tagging
the surface on hard-surfaced roads. It appears that some sort of hard
surface is more or less assumed by default. I do tag 'gravel', 'compacted',
'shale', 'sand', 'ground' assiduously, and usually add some sort of
assessment of 'smoothness' on those.

I'm very much against any kind of automated removal of 'tiger:reviewed'
because around here, the TIGER import has a hallucinatory quality.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Richard Fairhurst]

Bryan Housel wrote:
> We haven’t discussed automatic removal of any other tiger tags.
> (I don’t have a strong opinion for either keeping or removing them.)

I have a really strong opinion _against_ removing tiger:reviewed tags where
the road type and surface have not been manually reviewed!

cheers
Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tiger-Zip-Data-Removal-Project-Update-tp5898958p5899332.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Bryan Housel]

Hey Hans,
We have a closed issue on the iD tracker for automatic removal of 
`tiger:reviewed`:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2697 


We haven’t discussed automatic removal of any other tiger tags.  (I don’t have 
a strong opinion for either keeping or removing them.)

Thanks, Bryan



> On Jul 15, 2017, at 9:07 PM, Hans De Kryger  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the advice everyone. I have moved on to my normal editing. 
> 
> About the soft approach to tiger removal. I see no reason not to look into 
> it. Do i bring up these questions on github for Josm & iD?
> 
> On Jul 12, 2017 10:15 PM, mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> I sincerely hope you’ll reconsider because I know that you have a lot of 
> positive energy to bring to the US community.
> 
> I think what you might take away from this is that a single thread on the 
> mailing list is not always enough to gauge the temperature of the community. 
> There are many mappers who are not on the mailing list at all or, like me, 
> are on it but pay only occasional attention to it.  Once you start to get 
> negative feedback on edits, I think it is a signal to pause and rethink, and 
> perhaps spend some more time discussing. Not necessarily to give up! 
> Criticism and negativity are cheap commodities on the internet, and OSM is no 
> exception. 
> 
> I think there is value in your idea to remove redundant TIGER tags but 
> perhaps a different approach is called for. Frederik had some good advice to 
> share in that regard. Perhaps a more gentle way to go about it is to discuss 
> extending the set of tags that are automatically removed when editing a TIGER 
> way in JOSM (and iD?).
> 
> Best
> Martijn
> 
> 
>> On Jul 8, 2017, at 2:37 PM, Hans De Kryger > > wrote:
>> 
>> So last month i started a discussion about a project i took on removing 
>> Tiger zip data across the U.S. I brought it to the community after i 
>> received concern from quite a few mappers in the U.S. After getting more 
>> unfriendly changeset comments and messages in my inbox i'm officially done.  
>> The Project is done for good. Not really wanting to get in an argument daily 
>> with the messages I've gotten in my mailbox. I've learned first hand just 
>> how unfriendly the osm community can be. It makes me quite sad to see that 
>> side of the it. I've been apart of osm for 4+ years and this type of 
>> response from the community makes me never want to contribute ever again.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>> ___
>> 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 mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Hans De Kryger]

Thanks for the advice everyone. I have moved on to my normal editing.

About the soft approach to tiger removal. I see no reason not to look into
it. Do i bring up these questions on github for Josm & iD?

On Jul 12, 2017 10:15 PM,  wrote:

> Hi Hans,
>
> I sincerely hope you’ll reconsider because I know that you have a lot of
> positive energy to bring to the US community.
>
> I think what you might take away from this is that a single thread on the
> mailing list is not always enough to gauge the temperature of the
> community. There are many mappers who are not on the mailing list at all
> or, like me, are on it but pay only occasional attention to it.  Once you
> start to get negative feedback on edits, I think it is a signal to pause
> and rethink, and perhaps spend some more time discussing. Not necessarily
> to give up! Criticism and negativity are cheap commodities on the internet,
> and OSM is no exception.
>
> I think there is value in your idea to remove redundant TIGER tags but
> perhaps a different approach is called for. Frederik had some good advice
> to share in that regard. Perhaps a more gentle way to go about it is to
> discuss extending the set of tags that are automatically removed when
> editing a TIGER way in JOSM (and iD?).
>
> Best
> Martijn
>
>
> On Jul 8, 2017, at 2:37 PM, Hans De Kryger 
> wrote:
>
> So last month i started a discussion about a project i took on removing
> Tiger zip data across the U.S. I brought it to the community after i
> received concern from quite a few mappers in the U.S. After getting more
> unfriendly changeset comments and messages in my inbox i'm officially
> done.  The Project is done for good. Not really wanting to get in an
> argument daily with the messages I've gotten in my mailbox. I've learned
> first hand just how unfriendly the osm community can be. It makes me quite
> sad to see that side of the it. I've been apart of osm for 4+ years and
> this type of response from the community makes me never want to contribute
> ever again.
>
> *Regards,*
>
> *Hans*
> ___
> 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] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[m]

Hi Hans,

I sincerely hope you’ll reconsider because I know that you have a lot of 
positive energy to bring to the US community.

I think what you might take away from this is that a single thread on the 
mailing list is not always enough to gauge the temperature of the community. 
There are many mappers who are not on the mailing list at all or, like me, are 
on it but pay only occasional attention to it.  Once you start to get negative 
feedback on edits, I think it is a signal to pause and rethink, and perhaps 
spend some more time discussing. Not necessarily to give up! Criticism and 
negativity are cheap commodities on the internet, and OSM is no exception. 

I think there is value in your idea to remove redundant TIGER tags but perhaps 
a different approach is called for. Frederik had some good advice to share in 
that regard. Perhaps a more gentle way to go about it is to discuss extending 
the set of tags that are automatically removed when editing a TIGER way in JOSM 
(and iD?).

Best
Martijn


> On Jul 8, 2017, at 2:37 PM, Hans De Kryger  wrote:
> 
> So last month i started a discussion about a project i took on removing Tiger 
> zip data across the U.S. I brought it to the community after i received 
> concern from quite a few mappers in the U.S. After getting more unfriendly 
> changeset comments and messages in my inbox i'm officially done.  The Project 
> is done for good. Not really wanting to get in an argument daily with the 
> messages I've gotten in my mailbox. I've learned first hand just how 
> unfriendly the osm community can be. It makes me quite sad to see that side 
> of the it. I've been apart of osm for 4+ years and this type of response from 
> the community makes me never want to contribute ever again.
> 
> Regards,
> Hans
> ___
> 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] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Max Erickson]

Frederik wrote:
> I notice that at least two people who have negatively commented on your
> recent edits in changeset comments - Max Erickson and Steve A - are
> regulars on this mailing list, but they didn't get involved when you
> discussed the issue here four weeks ago.

As this is my second message, I'm probably not a regular on the list.

I saw the thread but didn't really have anything to add to the
comments from Jason Remillard, Mike N and Walter Nordmann. I do see
the particular edits as more or less noise but won't bother Hans
further if he chooses to continue with them.

Hans, I apologize for any discouragement my message caused. I tend to
write tersely and don't always do a good job of avoiding abrasiveness.


Max

(sorry if this message breaks threading a bit, I don't get messages
delivered and am experimenting with replying from an archive)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Mike Dupont]

Hans,

Just wanted to say to not give up working on osm.
Open Knowledge and Open source brings out the worst in people
sometimes, just look at the wikipedia edit wars, and other strife, for
example the systemd discussion.

Some people get very territorial about 'their' section of the map and
upset when someone changes something without talking to them. I have
also cleaned up my fair share of tiger poo, but to mass delete it
would upset me as well, because sometimes it is the best we have for
some remote area.

Try to pick something to contribute on that you can get buy in from
the stakeholders, make sure they support you and you will find that
your experience is much more positive!

mike



On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Hans De Kryger
 wrote:
> So last month i started a discussion about a project i took on removing
> Tiger zip data across the U.S. I brought it to the community after i
> received concern from quite a few mappers in the U.S. After getting more
> unfriendly changeset comments and messages in my inbox i'm officially done.
> The Project is done for good. Not really wanting to get in an argument daily
> with the messages I've gotten in my mailbox. I've learned first hand just
> how unfriendly the osm community can be. It makes me quite sad to see that
> side of the it. I've been apart of osm for 4+ years and this type of
> response from the community makes me never want to contribute ever again.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
James Michael DuPont

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Zip Data Removal Project (Update)

[Frederik Ramm]

Hans,

On 07/08/2017 10:37 PM, Hans De Kryger wrote:
> So last month i started a discussion about a project i took on removing
> Tiger zip data across the U.S. I brought it to the community after i
> received concern from quite a few mappers in the U.S.

I notice that at least two people who have negatively commented on your
recent edits in changeset comments - Max Erickson and Steve A - are
regulars on this mailing list, but they didn't get involved when you
discussed the issue here four weeks ago. A reason for this might be that
your thread title at the time was:

"Need advice on a project I've taken on"

and not

"Tiger ZIP removeal across the whole US"

which might have attracted more eyeballs at the time!

I also notice that, in the discussion at the time, you received a number
of comments, like

* observe guidelines for mechanical edits (since downloading stuff with
overpass and removing a tag without actually looking at the object you
are editing *is* a mechanical edit)

* use a separate account for the activity

* use a changeset comment that clearly states it's an automated edit to
remove obsolete tags

- none of which you seem to have heeded. At least one person here asked
why the data was being removed, and you tersely replied "The usefulness
is nonexistent" - which may be totally correct, but this exchange could
have demonstrated to you that more explanation is necessary.

Now I don't know what kind of abuse you received in personal email and I
am not condoning any of that, but I don't think you did your best for a
successful project. Next time, discuss it under a meaningful headline
ahead of making the first edits; set up a wiki page explaining why you
think the tags are useless; then proceed using good changeset comments
that point to the wiki page for explanation. For bonus points, make an
estimate before you start about how many objects will be touched and
explain how you plan to execute the edit.

Perhaps Steve A would like to explain what problems he saw with your
edit in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49381249 ?

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