On Monday 27 May 2019, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> I admit I am not convinced that it addresses the problem.
>
> I think that problem in in specific validator rule that is clearly
> unwanted by general community* and it does not matter when and how it
> appears.
Yes, i agree for this particular s
27 May 2019, 19:38 by o...@imagico.de:
> On Monday 27 May 2019, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>>
>> By default iD actively suggests to
>> - change objects modified by user (like JOSM)
>> - objects selected by user during editing
>>
>
> Wouldn't it be relatively simple to change the default to only
On Monday 27 May 2019, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> By default iD actively suggests to
> - change objects modified by user (like JOSM)
> - objects selected by user during editing
Wouldn't it be relatively simple to change the default to only touch
features modified by the user in the version depl
27 May 2019, 17:51 by o...@imagico.de:
> actively modifying features the mapper has not touched in
> their fundamental semantics. As already hinted i know too little about
> how iD works to specifically say something about how it fits in here.
>
By default iD actively suggests to
- change obj
On 27/05/2019 16:26, Frederik Ramm wrote:
AFAIK many editors for example silently drop "created-by" and didn't
hear anyone complain about that.
That's a bit different. "created-by" was, err,,, created by the
developers of the API/editors. Contributors never added it themselves.
It hasn't re
On Monday 27 May 2019, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> >
> > it seems clear to me that any tool that leads mappers to
> > unconsciously perform automated edits could and should be blocked
> > from write access to the API and accordingly should not be
> > available on osm.org.
>
> I guess that in cases where
Hi,
On 5/27/19 12:58, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>> * Automated Edits code of conduct
>> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct)
>> : You take advantage of mappers unconsciously adding highway=footway
>> to platforms. This is an automated edit.
> it seems clear to me t
For a very long time I have been trying to adopt the public_transport
scheme. After several years of asking it would be rendered on its own
without the need for highway=bus_stop tags, I'm giving up on it and came to
the conclusion that
highway=bus_stop on nodes next to the highway
and
highway=pl
On 27/05/2019 12:23, Phil Wyatt wrote:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dplatform
This suggests replacing highway=platform with public_transport=platform
Most of the public_transport=* tags are pure duplicates of existing,
more popular tags. They add nothing to the OSM databas
Am Mo., 27. Mai 2019 um 15:23 Uhr schrieb Andy Townsend :
> Occasionally there are examples of people
> accepting suggestions like this without thinking, and what I'd normally
> do in such cases is to comment on the changeset concerned and politely
> explain why in this particular case the sugge
On 27/05/2019 12:08, Jo wrote:
And the disease is spreading:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Jnd
I'm scared. This needs to be mitigated, but indeed, how?
Suggestions about tag improvements by an editor are not a new thing -
JOSM has had them for ages. Occasionally there are examples of people
a
In case that this is an undesirable wrong tagging one may request JOSM dev
to add validator rule fixing this.
You may also propose worldwide bot edit reverting such changes.
(note, I am not sure whatever either is a good idea, it is one of reasons why I
did neither)
27 May 2019, 13:08 by winfi.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dplatform
This suggests replacing highway=platform with public_transport=platform
Cheers - Phil
From: Jo [mailto:winfi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 27 May 2019 9:04 PM
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Rem
And the disease is spreading:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Jnd
I'm scared. This needs to be mitigated, but indeed, how?
Jo
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:03 PM Jo wrote:
> I went to check a platform tagged as
>
> highway=platform
>
> which is perfectly alright.
>
> iD tells me that's deprecated and
I went to check a platform tagged as
highway=platform
which is perfectly alright.
iD tells me that's deprecated and suggests to change it to:
public_transport=platform
bus=yes
Then upon uploading it tells me another "improvement" can be made:
highway=footway
So they are transposing highway=p
On Monday 27 May 2019, Simon Poole wrote:
> The problem with this (and the longer thread on tagging), that it has
> had exactly 0 effect.
>
> As I see it we can choose between
>
> [...]
I think this is a too limited view of the options the OSM community has.
I in particular see:
* a wide range
Andrew Hain wrote:
> Have a new team of developers code from the codebase of iD.
> Write a new online editor from scratch.
> Abandon online editing and tell everyone to use an offline editor.
Please stop trolling.
Richard
--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242
I cant see how a new team of developers would help - they would be operating
under the same rules (which I suspect are pretty vague) as all the current
developers. Who at the moment dictates which editors can be used at osm.org?
If they don't like ID, they can get it turned off.
If the ID edito
Wiklund Johan wrote:
> Adding footway to the platform serves no purpose but to please poorly
> built
> routing engines.
Are there actually any such engines, or is this a post-facto justification?
OSRM has routed over platforms since 8 September 2013. Valhalla does - it's
multimodal and you can't
Also:
Have a new team of developers code from the codebase of iD.
Write a new online editor from scratch.
Abandon online editing and tell everyone to use an offline editor.
--
Andrew
From: Simon Poole
Sent: 27 May 2019 11:07
To: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t..
The problem with this (and the longer thread on tagging), that it has
had exactly 0 effect.
As I see it we can choose between
- doing nothing (seems to be most popular currently)
- wage an edit war by reverting any edits that clearly do not correspond
to best practices (not good)
- put in place
21 matches
Mail list logo
