Inspired by the discussion on the Successful proposal proposal
discussion I restarted the discussion about improving the map features
management on the german forums:
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=9604
Everybody feel free to join the discussion :)
Matthias
2010/10/13 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de
Inspired by the discussion on the Successful proposal proposal discussion
I restarted the discussion about improving the map features management on
the german forums:
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=9604
Everybody feel free to join
Nice aspects Pieren,
I agree your point of view concerning votes and how decissions were
taken by (a smal part of) the community.
Ok so your idea seem to be very familar to this idea 'garage'/incubator
with the aim to discuss an feature idea more to vote on it?
Yes voting is not
But how do we deal with the map features list, should they be managed?
Managed by who? Managed by which guidelines?
If map features were really to be mantained as an official list of OSM
features, then they should be somehow enforced in applications. A sort
of OSM certification for consumers
Hi, there were no more ideas till somebody mentioned, that the voting
process cant be repaired.
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2010-August/004023.html
Can anybody tell me why it cant be repaired or how we should manage the
Map feature list instead to avoid a tagging chaos? :)
2010/9/7 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de
Hi, there were no more ideas till somebody mentioned, that the voting
process cant be repaired.
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2010-August/004023.html
Can anybody tell me why it cant be repaired or how we should manage the Map
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:32 AM, Pierre-Alain Dorange pdora...@mac.com wrote:
flow seems relevant information only for boat and navigation, i suppose
boat can't go into this kind of waterway...
Actually flow is primarily relevant for, well, flow. Where will the
chemicals on your lawn end up
2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
Oops it's not lost. It's on the waterway=river and waterway=stream wiki
pages.
So how do you specify that (a) you mapped a waterway but don't know
the direction of flow, (b) it's a stagnant channel with no real flow,
or (c) it's an artificial
Is there any reason why you discuss this tag using this title?
This is anoying cause my filter dont match.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2010/8/31 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
Is there any reason why you discuss this tag using this title?
This is anoying cause my filter dont match.
Is there any reason you don't quote any text so that we would know
what you're talking about?
___
2010/8/29 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
culvert=yes is ambiguous: does it refer to the object on top or
underneath?
our tags refer to the object they are associated with. Simple like
that, isn't it?
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:47 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/29 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
culvert=yes is ambiguous: does it refer to the object on top or
underneath?
our tags refer to the object they are associated with. Simple like
that, isn't it?
2010/8/30 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:47 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/29 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
culvert=yes is ambiguous: does it refer to the object on top or
underneath?
our tags refer to the object they are
2010/8/30 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:08 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you show me the example? I don't understand structure and I
would like to know, which kind of way it is (what are the other
tags?).
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 12:38 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/30 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/48598384
If this was tagged culvert=yes rather than bridge=culvert, it wouldn't
be clear whether it's a bridge or tunnel.
Ok this seem to be a problem but again, is this related in some way with
'Non proposed features'?
Matthias
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
That's true, but IMHO the wrong way is tagged there: the culvert
should go on the waterway, i.e. where it is.
What do you mean by where it is? The culvert is the structure that
carries the road over the waterway.
I'm not sure i have understand,
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange pdora...@mac.comwrote:
I'm not sure i have understand, but (for me) a culvert can't carries a
road over ; a culvert is a kind of tube that goes under a structure to
allow water to go throught a roadrail...
Wikipedia for example tell :
On Monday 30 August 2010 19:19:21 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
How else would you tag water flow?
Somewhere, probably lost in the depths of time, it was agreed that waterflow
is modeled by the direction of the waterway way without a oneway tag.
Oops it's not lost. It's on the waterway=river and
On 08/30/2010 03:35 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
That's true, but IMHO the wrong way is tagged there: the culvert
should go on the waterway, i.e. where it is.
What do you mean by where it is? The culvert is the structure that
carries
On 8/30/10 6:49 PM, Stephen Hope wrote:
On 31 August 2010 08:36, John F. Eldredgej...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
Also, how do you reverse a way?
In JOSM, you just use Reverse way. Don't know about potlatch, but it
would have to be there somewhere, or you can't get one way streets to
work
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On Monday 30 August 2010 19:19:21 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
How else would you tag water flow?
Somewhere, probably lost in the depths of time, it was agreed that waterflow
is modeled by the direction of the waterway way without
On 30/08/2010 21:48, Pieren wrote:
And if you go ahead with this article:
When boxes or pipes are placed side-by-side to create a width of
greater than twenty feet, the culvert is defined as a bridge in the
United States
And if you go on reading it says This is a requirement of the federal
rapidly
enough that its surface level was temporarily higher than in the upstream
section, making that a downhill flow also.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features
From :mailto:nerou...@gmail.com
Date :Mon Aug 30 20:44:53 America/Chicago 2010
On Mon, Aug 30
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:10 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features
From :mailto:nerou...@gmail.com
Date :Mon Aug 30 20:44:53 America/Chicago 2010
So how do you specify that (a) you mapped a waterway
If you procedd posting culvert related mails under this general topic
nodoby will be able to find them in the future. So please return to the
right discussion topic.
Matthias
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
2010/8/28 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
You write in the wiki that it is unable to repair it and spot on a working
group.
Just so we're clear, I mean the current prescribed method of requiring
people to vote on proposals is broken, there is thousands of
contributors and most proposals don't
Perhaps all contributors should be required to vote one way or the other. It
should not be an option, and failure to do so after agreeing to such, should
have penalty/consequence(like OSMF having right to then convert it to ODbL).
Eric Jarvies
On Aug 28, 2010, at 11:59 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 29 August 2010 16:34, Eric Jarvies e...@csl.com.mx wrote:
Perhaps all contributors should be required to vote one way or the other. It
should not be an option, and failure to do so after agreeing to such, should
have penalty/consequence(like OSMF having right to then convert it to ODbL).
On Sunday 29 August 2010 07:59:51 John Smith wrote:
however the current suggestion of a do-ocracy seems doomed to
end in endless/pointless disputes as well, take a look at the most
recent pointless thread over culverts.
That is actually not an example of the do-ocracy way. Because the people
On 29 August 2010 18:40, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
That is actually not an example of the do-ocracy way. Because the people that
do (those who tagged culverts) had pretty much united behind culvert=yes.
It might work fine in this case, however if it's a bad idea, for what
ever reason,
On Sunday 29 August 2010 10:45:21 John Smith wrote:
On 29 August 2010 18:40, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
That is actually not an example of the do-ocracy way. Because the people
that do (those who tagged culverts) had pretty much united behind
culvert=yes.
It might work fine in
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On Sunday 29 August 2010 07:59:51 John Smith wrote:
however the current suggestion of a do-ocracy seems doomed to
end in endless/pointless disputes as well, take a look at the most
recent pointless thread over culverts.
That
On Sunday 29 August 2010 11:27:03 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Then we got the people who like pointless discussions that wanted to
change something they were not even mapping.
I've used bridge=culvert and tunnel=culvert since long before the
recent discussion.
You are user NE2 not?
Then
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On Sunday 29 August 2010 11:27:03 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Then we got the people who like pointless discussions that wanted to
change something they were not even mapping.
I've used bridge=culvert and tunnel=culvert since
I not sure if this has anything todo more with proposed features...
Matthias
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2010/8/28 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
How can we improve this process?
Didn't you already ask this on one of the wiki pages?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Yes in some way but I pointed on thinks that are in my opinion the
problem. There might be others that I don't see, right?
You write in the wiki that it is unable to repair it and spot on a
working group.
I think this will be a nice idea even if it might result in a discussion
if this
I added an hint on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:No_proposal explaining why a
page had been labeled as no proposal.
Matthias
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 17/08/2010, at 2:09 AM, Matthias Meißer wrote:
Yes soft moderation by the community but therefore the community needs some
central space and some guidelines. You already see the lack of voters, just
cause it's to decentral communication atm.
It's also because some people (myself included)
1. So what is your idea? What do you think of how it can be improved?
2. Yes of course, otherwise I wouldn't ask here ;) But once again,
this is not a good/bad feature discussion. It's just the question of new
and may be problematic features should be taken back to /proposed for
further
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, Cartinus wrote:
Concluding less than six hours after your initial post to this mailinglist
that nobody has a problem with what you propose is: youthfull exuberance ?
impatience ? It is certainly is not the way to go.
6 hours isn't one rotation of the earth, and certainly
Hi everybody,
as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.
Therefore I asked at the talk page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request
I checked
On 16/08/2010 16:31, Matthias Meißer wrote:
Hi everybody,
as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.
Therefore I asked at the talk page
Well, this idea is not to telling you do's and dont's, it's just to
manage ideas.
IMHO the current process lacks a few details that are mentioned (and can
be discussed by everyone here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request
As some of you might noted with
Am 16. August 2010 16:31 schrieb Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
I checked the current german map feature list and noticed a lot few features
and key that are new but non proposed. I beg the authors to move them out of
the list back to the proposed features.
this might not in all cases be
Well I'm not talking about undoing very common features but about a few
new ones that seemed to be a bad design (even if I like the idea to get
a feature e.g. for OFFICE=*). For fine tuning is the /Proposed list, right?
Yes soft moderation by the community but therefore the community needs
Am 16. August 2010 18:09 schrieb Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
central space and some guidelines. You already see the lack of voters, just
cause it's to decentral communication atm.
RFC and voting start are announced on talk-list and often on some
local lists as well. I fear that the lack
2010/8/17 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
opinion. Thats why nobody knows that there are new features, nobody talked
about it, nobody made a review :(
But they do get talked about, take for example this thread where
someone added a shop that no one seems to agree with:
But OSM is more than just the major lists (see people like me that sign
on/off lists to avoid to much mails). As I said it would be a good idea
to feature our proposal incubator a little bit more ;) I'm pretty sure
if the users have no Push but a Pop media (e.g. the weekly newsletters)
they
2010/8/17 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
But OSM is more than just the major lists (see people like me that sign
on/off lists to avoid to much mails). As I said it would be a good idea to
feature our proposal incubator a little bit more ;) I'm pretty sure if the
users have no Push but a Pop
Well ok might be possbile but for that reason there are other channels
e.g. forums, MLs that have their own pros and cons.
So nobody really has a problem with refactoring /Proposed, right? If so
it would be nice if you review the upcoming changes. But this will take
time cause I'm involved in
2010/8/17 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
Well ok might be possbile but for that reason there are other channels e.g.
forums, MLs that have their own pros and cons.
There is software that can show mailing list posts in the same way as
forums, the forums are only used by a minority of people,
On Monday 16 August 2010 22:07:07 Matthias Meißer wrote:
So nobody really has a problem with refactoring /Proposed, right?
Yes, many people will have a problem with that. The people actually voting on
the wiki are a very small group. Pushing tags already documented and in use
back into the
Sry @all, was my mistake, what I tried to say is that I will improve the
/proposed page (and only this one). So restyling, splitting text but
nothing on the features itself, is this ok?
Yes you can read MLs in a forum or RSS like way, but mostly you have to
be member of the mailinglist to
Hi everybody,
as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.
Therefore I asked at the talk page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request
I
56 matches
Mail list logo
