On 2014-10-16 18:04, Yves wrote:
Because its the purpose of this particular software.
Not wanting to diminish this search, but why would you show an error
roads not connected when they are connected? What is the rationale
behind flagging this as a possible error?
Regards,
Maarten
On 16
For users to check if it's an error or not, and to correct if needed. QA
softwares look at possible error according to automatic rules in this exact
purpose.
Yves
Le 18 octobre 2014 20:37:21 CEST, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl a écrit :
On 2014-10-16 18:04, Yves wrote:
Because its the purpose
On 2014-10-18 21:28, Yves wrote:
For users to check if it's an error or not, and to correct if needed.
QA softwares look at possible error according to automatic rules in
this exact purpose.
Yes, obviously. But why flag this as a possible error?
Regards,
Maarten
Le 18 octobre 2014 20:37:21
So, your software could potentially mark every connection between two roads as
roads not connected, leading to having to verify every intersection in the
world? Sounds like a very bad design.
On October 18, 2014 2:28:01 PM CDT, Yves yve...@gmail.com wrote:
For users to check if it's an error
Dave,
IMHO the best way to avoid problems in that spot is to do what other
suggested: add the footpath between the 2 street (thereby fixing the
navigation for pedestrians) and/or adding the small piece of landuse=grass
+ the tree.
I assume nobody will remove that just to fix a problem reported by
2014-10-16 8:28 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com:
IMHO the best way to avoid problems in that spot is to do what other
suggested: add the footpath between the 2 street (thereby fixing the
navigation for pedestrians) and/or adding the small piece of landuse=grass
+ the tree.
+0.95
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yes, in a case like the sidewalk separating them as a barrier though,
you can simply add a noexit=yes on the road end. All major error
checkers override the warning when this is present.
I think this is the obvious solution and am surprised this
Hi Marc
I had a footpath between them.
IMO users should be responsible for their own actions. Users should map
what they believe to be useful or important objects with little
benefit just to prevent others adding errors. Especially when those
errors aren't mistakes, but guesses made with
On 2014-10-16 15:15, Dave F. wrote:
I had a footpath between them.
So the problem is also that the check is wrong. Apperantly it looks at
major roads that are apart, but doesn't see that they are connected by
another road.
IMHO these cases should not be shown at all.
Regards,
Maarten
On 16/10/2014 14:28, Maarten Deen wrote:
On 2014-10-16 15:15, Dave F. wrote:
I had a footpath between them.
So the problem is also that the check is wrong. Apperantly it looks at
major roads that are apart, but doesn't see that they are connected by
another road.
IMHO these cases should
2014-10-16 15:43 GMT+02:00 SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk:
and the way to fix that is to bring all mappers (paid or otherwise) into
the community, so that they can learn from the mistakes that we've _all_
made in the past*
I think the fact that the mapper was paid to edit does
On 16/10/2014 14:43, SomeoneElse wrote:
On 16/10/2014 14:28, Maarten Deen wrote:
On 2014-10-16 15:15, Dave F. wrote:
I had a footpath between them.
So the problem is also that the check is wrong. Apperantly it looks
at major roads that are apart, but doesn't see that they are
connected
On 2014-10-16 15:43, SomeoneElse wrote:
On 16/10/2014 14:28, Maarten Deen wrote:
On 2014-10-16 15:15, Dave F. wrote:
I had a footpath between them.
So the problem is also that the check is wrong. Apperantly it looks at
major roads that are apart, but doesn't see that they are connected by
Because its the purpose of this particular software.
On 16 octobre 2014 17:10:03 UTC+02:00, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On 2014-10-16 15:43, SomeoneElse wrote:
On 16/10/2014 14:28, Maarten Deen wrote:
On 2014-10-16 15:15, Dave F. wrote:
I had a footpath between them.
So the
Please, no. noexit=yes is wrong as there is an exit at least for foot.
Adding a short connecting path in between is the right solution.
The QA software should not report the case if there is a connection and
even if it is reported you would not change the situation if unsure but
rather get in
Ian
I will make reinforce my point of view vehemently, especially when
misuse of Google is implied, definitely when repeated amendments are
to the detriment of the database.
Regards
Dave F.
On 14/10/2014 17:22, Ian Dees wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Dave F.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:32:44 -0400, Aaron Lidman aaronlid...@gmail.com
wrote:
The software is not being misused to insert errors into the OSM database, it
was a mistake. Just like Keepright, Osmose, and JOSM, to-fix has false positives. It's
unfortunate and we're actively working to reduce
On 13/10/2014 14:35, Simon Poole wrote:
Hi Serge
I believe Alex Barth has identified himself as responsible for MapBox's
data team and I would suggest to Dave discussing with Alex if there
are issues.
The mapper in question has identified himself as a MapBox employee, the
correct and good
Hi,
On 10/14/2014 05:20 PM, Dave F. wrote:
It's the misuse by end users that's causing vandalism.
The term vandalism should be reserved for situations in which people
break things on purpose, or at best by grossly reckless behaviour.
If someone is over-eager in using software that purports to
Am 14.10.2014 15:18, schrieb Richard Welty: On Mon, 13 Oct 2014
13:32:44 -0400, Aaron Lidman aaronlid...@gmail.com
wrote:
The software is not being misused to insert errors into the OSM
database, it was a mistake. Just like Keepright, Osmose, and JOSM,
to-fix has false positives. It's
On 14/10/2014 16:37, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 10/14/2014 05:20 PM, Dave F. wrote:
It's the misuse by end users that's causing vandalism.
The term vandalism should be reserved for situations in which people
break things on purpose, or at best by grossly reckless behaviour.
If someone is
On 13/10/2014 17:18, Aaron Lidman wrote:
Hi Dave,
Richrico should have responded. The Mapbox data team has a policy to
respond to all questions from the community. I'm sorry he didn't, he
has now, and we've reminded all members of our data team of this
policy. This should no longer be an
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
On 13/10/2014 17:18, Aaron Lidman wrote:
Looking at the imagery I can see how it might be thought they connect,
especially when none of us are using google maps for verification, right?
Wrong. I was using Streetview to
Hi
Once again I've had user Richrico use this website:
http://osmlab.github.io/to-fix/?error=unconnected_major5 to inaccurately
amend data in OSM.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65398595#map=19/51.32464/-2.22817
Way: 65398595 This way is /not/ joined.
For clarification:
On 2014-10-13 12:48, Dave F. wrote:
Once again I've had user Richrico use this website:
http://osmlab.github.io/to-fix/?error=unconnected_major5 [1] to
inaccurately amend data in OSM.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65398595#map=19/51.32464/-2.22817
[2]
Way: 65398595 This way is _not_
On 10/13/2014 6:48 AM, Dave F. wrote:
This, other similar types of software is being misused to insert
errors into the OSM database.
Without local knowledge there is no way users can be sure of the
accuracy of there edits. They should stick to what they know. I believe
this type of validation
On 13/10/2014 11:48, Dave F. wrote:
Hi
Once again I've had user Richrico use this website:
http://osmlab.github.io/to-fix/?error=unconnected_major5 to
inaccurately amend data in OSM.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65398595#map=19/51.32464/-2.22817
Way: 65398595 This way is /not/ joined.
2014-10-13 14:06 GMT+02:00 Mike N nice...@att.net:
This could be a valid use of noexit=yes so that it won't be back on the
QA tool?
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-April/017367.html
I agree, noexit=yes is the best solution, but you could also draw a little
Dave
IMHO you should be talking to MapBox directly. If your local neighbour
accidentally starts messing around in your garden you take it up with
your neighbour. If a gardening company starts work in your area and
mistakenly starts work in your garden, and the employee doesn't react to
you
Simon,
That's a great point you make, about talking directly with your
neighbor. But speaking as someone who had some negative experiences in
a similar situation dealing with digitizers (offsite mappers) working
for a company- how does one engage a company vs an account? If you are
seeing
Hi Serge
I believe Alex Barth has identified himself as responsible for MapBox's
data team and I would suggest to Dave discussing with Alex if there
are issues.
The mapper in question has identified himself as a MapBox employee, the
correct and good thing to do, it probably simply needs a
Simon,
So if i understand you right, the answer for a mapper is to find a
company representative and work with them? Do we have a list of such
representatives and their contact, along with the accounts that work
on their behalf?
- Serge
___
talk
Dave -
Alex here, I work with Richman (user account RichRico). Thanks for
reporting. Looking into these issues now. Let me get back to you.
The thread you opened here on talk exposed a weakness in our data team
policy - you had no way to actually find from Richman's profile to my
contact to
Hi Dave,
Richrico should have responded. The Mapbox data team has a policy to respond to
all questions from the community. I'm sorry he didn't, he has now, and we've
reminded all members of our data team of this policy. This should no longer be
an issue in the future and all of our data team
Well we don't, which is clearly a weakness of the system as is. It is
clearly is asking too much of the individual mapper to actually know
whom to talk to. I'm fairly sure that simply adding the necessary
information in some form to the employed users page is the best
solution, anything else
35 matches
Mail list logo
