Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 21:27 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > Because it is especially broken and confusing - and promotes tagging for > renderer. > this is not a case of "tagging for the renderer" as it is usually referred to (using a tag differently from what it w

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

Because it is especially broken and confusing - and promotes tagging for renderer. "not hurting anybody in any way" is quite strong claim that I think is false. It is not a big problem but every time someone encounters it for the first time either has one more thing on "confusing things about O

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

Why would we want to create new versions of objects just to remove a tag that is not hurting anybody in any way? The correct way to handle this is to add the tag to the list of deprecated tags that should be automatically removed (essentially iD has a list and JOSM has one too), when and if the ob

[OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

osmarender:nameDirection=* is an old tag that is case of tagging for the renderer. Additionally, Osmarender is defunct anyway. I propose to purge this tag from database as useless, confusing and encouraging tagging for renderer. This edit would remove about 2000 osmarender:nameDirection=* tag

Re: [OSM-talk] Your thoughts on osm.org

Hi all, thanks for sharing. Some recurring / interesting topics I picked up: * More attention to community, local groups, mapping together, the ‘people’ aspect of OSM * Still have a map but smaller * More information directly on or accessible from main page, for example * How-to / learn t

Re: [OSM-talk] Maproulette

> On Mar 15, 2019, at 8:30 AM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: ... > I was rather interested in checking whatever there is any place in world with > more > mappers than task. > I created Maproulette task long time ago and noone was solving it, one of > reasons was > that it was in places flooded any

Re: [OSM-talk] pic4review | Re: 140 000 shops of unspecified type

Hello, Great to see Pic4Review being used :-) Note that missions can be configured with ready-to-use answers, mission creator set the possible answers (one per shop=* value, picture/symbol can be associated) so that contributors don't need to write shop value themselves when reviewing. This c

Re: [OSM-talk] Maproulette

Mar 15, 2019, 3:25 PM by m...@rtijn.org: > > >> On Mar 15, 2019, at 4:39 AM, Mateusz Konieczny <>> matkoni...@tutanota.com >> >> > wrote: >> > ... > >> >> Are you aware about any location across the world that suffers from >> lack of tasks in Maproulette for map

Re: [OSM-talk] Maproulette

> On Mar 15, 2019, at 4:39 AM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: ... > > Are you aware about any location across the world that suffers from > lack of tasks in Maproulette for mappers? > > I would create something there (though not for shop=yes, it often requires > survey). You can create a global

[OSM-talk] pic4review | Re: 140 000 shops of unspecified type

On 15/03/2019 11:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: how to find it? JOSM validator since latest released version complains about shop=yes - just download data and run validator Osmose has support for displaying JOSM validator complaints http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#item=9002&level=1%2C2%2C3

Re: [OSM-talk] 140 000 shops of unspecified type

Mar 15, 2019, 11:31 AM by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 11:13 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <> > matkoni...@tutanota.com > >: > >> About 4% of all tagged shops have shop=yes as its primary tag what is >> not properly providing informatio

Re: [OSM-talk] Maproulette

Mar 15, 2019, 11:31 AM by md...@xs4all.nl: > On 2019-03-15 11:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> About 4% of all tagged shops have shop=yes as its primary tag what is >> >> not properly providing information about shop type. >> >> It would nice to reduce it a bit (at least stop growing share of

Re: [OSM-talk] 140 000 shops of unspecified type

Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 11:35 Uhr schrieb Maarten Deen : > This would be a perfect job to make a Maproulette task for. yes, as the original mapper who knew the shop could not find an appropriate tag to describe it we let it do a remote mapper in a gamified context and with no clue about the ac

Re: [OSM-talk] 140 000 shops of unspecified type

On 2019-03-15 11:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: About 4% of all tagged shops have shop=yes as its primary tag what is not properly providing information about shop type. It would nice to reduce it a bit (at least stop growing share of shop=* tags). how to find it? JOSM validator since lat

Re: [OSM-talk] 140 000 shops of unspecified type

Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 11:13 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > About 4% of all tagged shops have shop=yes as its primary tag what is > not properly providing information about shop type. > > It would nice to reduce it a bit (at least stop growing share of shop=* > tags)

[OSM-talk] 140 000 shops of unspecified type

About 4% of all tagged shops have shop=yes as its primary tag what is not properly providing information about shop type. It would nice to reduce it a bit (at least stop growing share of shop=* tags). how to find it? JOSM validator since latest released version complains about shop=yes - j