Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated
oops, Aaron, I'm afraid I was not clear in at least one of my statements. so sorry. On 06/02/2020 15:42, Aaron Young wrote: but also checks with the local community, if there is any, what special agreements rule in the local community. for Panamá, I would like to have such activities listed in a dedicated page in the *wiki*. This is doable and we try, without making an excuse, it is hard to determine who to coordinate with in “each” community. This may be because mappers are active, not active, want to be communicative and others don’t. I would also be hesitant to agree to “special agreements” which might take away from the idea of open, free data for all to utilize. Utilizing the main OSM wiki for editing standards is preferred, with limited country specific editing guidelines. This creates a more global map for all. when I speak of special agreements, I refer to the contents, not to the licenses. like what do we do in a case like … (here comes the description of the case). osm is IMO very north-centric: not only does it speak British English all over the place, in the terms to use, but also in the concepts it implements. take "village green". I've been using in Panama because there's a lot of places with open space not belonging to anybody in particular. but go to the description in the wiki, and you get the impression that OSM is made for-and-by the blind British retired high rank military. anyhow. "special agreements" on how to use tags and values, that's what I meant. possibly with pictures. think of Highway Tag Africa. also, again thinking of Panama, most places get at least 4000mm rain yearly, some ~6000mm, Pacific weather pattern is different from Caribbean, the so called Cordillera Central is a transition zone with the worst of the two sides, and then there's Herrera-Los Santos with possibly 1500mm/year. any road with 'surface:ground' absolutely needs an indication of the period when it can be expected to be usable. 'ford:yes' also need that. 'incline' can be of great help. that's just what me as a newcomer to the place can think of. I'm not sure where to find this information other than coming here and observing yourself. […] Example from South Africa (we started this after Panama): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/South_Africa#Kaart_Groundwork_.26_Mapping interesting, not enough people here in Panama for so much work, but interesting. chapeau! ciao, M ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated
> but also checks with the local community, if there is any, > what special agreements rule in the local community. for Panamá, I > would like to have such activities listed in a dedicated page in the > *wiki*. This is doable and we try, without making an excuse, it is hard to determine who to coordinate with in “each” community. This may be because mappers are active, not active, want to be communicative and others don’t. I would also be hesitant to agree to “special agreements” which might take away from the idea of open, free data for all to utilize. Utilizing the main OSM wiki for editing standards is preferred, with limited country specific editing guidelines. This creates a more global map for all. > good news Kaart collecting experience and building on it. may I suggest > you also help local communities make their rules more explicit. to make > a concrete example, again for Panamá, did not agree on (did not discuss) > *how to categorize highways*, nor do we know where to collect 'ref' values. We do this. For example, we note what we did in country and then offer some suggestions to advance the editing process there. We have working with editors around the world on road classifications. In this incident, we didn’t do it well enough. Example from South Africa (we started this after Panama): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/South_Africa#Kaart_Groundwork_.26_Mapping <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/South_Africa#Kaart_Groundwork_.26_Mapping> > we also hardly have any factual information about rural bus routes. why > is this relevant? a road on which you have a regular service, however > crummy, can hardly qualify as "unclassified", but would be promoted to > "tertiary" at the least. could serve as reference. also, knowing what > kind of car runs the service would help with the "smoothness" tag. > collecting this information needs to happen locally, and I don't manage > to picture the difficulties and the costs associated to doing this. I think we agree on this classification and it illustrates why we travel so much, to get the local context for the data. We really try to understand the ‘function’ of the road more than the infrastructure and legislation for the road. Indicators like vehicle traffic density (imagery shows lots of cars driving as opposed to parked), trucks, buses, etc are useful to decide even if the road looks like it was built to be residential or unclassified. Construction, landslides, hurricanes, etc can alter which roads are classified as what because repairs don’t always happen within weeks of the closure event. This is why constant maintenance is so important. Your idea for GPS units is a good one. I’d encourage smartphone usage, perhaps drivers can passively run apps to record info to upload to OSM. GoMap!! Is iOS based and works great for this purpose. Aaron > On Feb 6, 2020, at 1:10 PM, talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > > Send talk mailing list submissions to > talk@openstreetmap.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of talk digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" (Mario Frasca) > 2. Re: Crimea situation - on the ground (Imre Samu) > 3. Old maps from Royal Collection UK (Andy Mabbett) > > > ------------------ > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 08:43:47 -0500 > From: Mario Frasca > To: talk@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > Hi Aaron, > > thank you for your writing! > > On 05/02/2020 23:50, Aaron Young wrote: >> in this instance we slipped up and didn’t communicate well enough. We are >> working to improve that now both in Panama and elsewhere > > I had a pleasant chat yesterday with Jorge Aguirre, and he insisted in > explaining that in 2015 Kaart as an organization was very early in its > learning process. I suggested adopting/adapting the *Directed Editing > Guidelines*, and my personal point of view, which I'm sharing now here, > is that whoever organizes edits should not only follow the global > guidelines (I like to think of them as "Brexit on World Trade > Agreements"), but also checks wit
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
Hi Aaron, thank you for your writing! On 05/02/2020 23:50, Aaron Young wrote: in this instance we slipped up and didn’t communicate well enough. We are working to improve that now both in Panama and elsewhere I had a pleasant chat yesterday with Jorge Aguirre, and he insisted in explaining that in 2015 Kaart as an organization was very early in its learning process. I suggested adopting/adapting the *Directed Editing Guidelines*, and my personal point of view, which I'm sharing now here, is that whoever organizes edits should not only follow the global guidelines (I like to think of them as "Brexit on World Trade Agreements"), but also checks with the local community, if there is any, what special agreements rule in the local community. for Panamá, I would like to have such activities listed in a dedicated page in the *wiki*. if you could describe them in Spanish, it would be much better, but if you're putting an English language page in the wiki, I'm sure there are enough non-Kaart people who would help translate that. in fact, editing the local activities page in the wiki would be sufficient to *alert the local community*, or at least anyone watching that page. On 05/02/2020 23:50, Aaron Young wrote: maintain the data to make sure it is as good as it can be, which is what initiated this conversation good news Kaart collecting experience and building on it. may I suggest you also help local communities make their rules more explicit. to make a concrete example, again for Panamá, did not agree on (did not discuss) *how to categorize highways*, nor do we know where to collect 'ref' values. we also hardly have any factual information about rural bus routes. why is this relevant? a road on which you have a regular service, however crummy, can hardly qualify as "unclassified", but would be promoted to "tertiary" at the least. could serve as reference. also, knowing what kind of car runs the service would help with the "smoothness" tag. collecting this information needs to happen locally, and I don't manage to picture the difficulties and the costs associated to doing this. [[as a complete *side thread*, a concrete example: I recently tracked a "chiva" only doing a short round trip from Santa Fé, travelling through El Pantano, which cost me $4. I uploaded the trace as private, that was a mistake. https://www.openstreetmap.org/trace/3198854/data, one of the GPS lost power on the way back, I should upload the data from the other device. with some extra cheap GPS devices (I own 5, not all equally good), and some official-looking piece of paper from an organization, one could spend half a day distributing phones running OSMTracker to bus drivers and collecting them when they're back. and moving to the next "piquera" for a different round. rural routes here may come back after more than 5 hours, and I know of routes where a one-way ticket costs $8. ]] I am considering how to describe the above, but did not yet create the relevant wiki page/paragraph. since Kaart is helping reclassify roads (in Panamá), it would be nice if we had some agreements on how to do that. and given we did not have it yet, in Panamá, it would be nice if you publicly offered your thoughts for discussion, so we can reach an agreement we can describe and follow. for *old edits*, I would consider very helpful if someone within Kaart would receive notifications on changesets produced under the Kaart flag. see BlueSombra, and all other Kaart abandoned accounts, with all the comments still waiting for a reply. a point which I'm afraid has been missed: the reply I received by Vigo gave me the impression "past is past, and we don't look back (but you may tide up our mess)". I understand that you're not focusing on mapping businesses any more, and I realize it's too much work for anybody, to look up the mess and clean it up, but there must be other ways to *profile yourself as responsible for the data you added*, even if it was while you were early in your learning process. ciao, Mario ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
Hi Everyone, I’d like to respond to the concern about Kaart in this thread. I am responsible for the editing teams at Kaart and take responsibility for their actions. We try to coordinate and communicate with editors in countries that we are editing data in, it is at times difficult to keep track of all the locations and editors globally and in this instance we slipped up and didn’t communicate well enough. We are working to improve that now both in Panama and elsewhere. I have asked Jorge, who lives in Guatemala City and works with Kaart, to assist with understanding what we can all do to further uplift data in Panama and the surrounding countries. We care about the data and routinely monitor and maintain the data to make sure it is as good as it can be, which is what initiated this conversation. Regarding the data in Panama, we drove through much of Panama in 2015 (I personally did) and contributed improvements through visual verification of road signs, roadway geometry, etc. You can find all the images in Mapillary by filtering for “kaartcam” in Panama. Our editors debated and tried to make sense of the OSM wiki and edit the data applicable to Panama the best we could, without a local community of editors to guide us. This was also pre-"Directed Editing Guidelines” and so we were doing our best with what was available at the time. In addition, we were adding in loads of shops/business to Panama with the hope that local editors would notice and carry the data forward beyond what we could do (a reason to upload imagery to Mapillary). That has had mixed results and we now don’t edit shops/businesses very much. I hope this helps clarify some of the confusion and we are happy to assist in improvements as always. ~Aaron. > On Feb 5, 2020, at 1:06 PM, talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > > Send talk mailing list submissions to > talk@openstreetmap.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of talk digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" (Mario Frasca) > 2. Re: it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" (Andy Townsend) > 3. Re: it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" (Mario Frasca) > 4. Re: MWG needs some customizations in CiviCRM (michael spreng) > 5. Re: it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" - fake building > for several shops inside one building (marc marc) > > > ---------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 12:18:01 -0500 > From: Mario Frasca > To: talk@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" > Message-ID: <6be62b91-17ea-c6a9-68b3-bb3d4a3df...@anche.no> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 05/02/2020 11:53, Andy Townsend wrote: >> it can sometimes be difficult to decide where one building ends and >> the next starts > > sometimes, sometimes it's clear. sometimes you walk in the area, you > see the façade and you wonder how they can know the name of the shop and > not have seen it's three shops in the same building, nor take note of > what kind of shop it is. > >> the whole Avenida B in Panamá has buildings which have been split like >> this. I have personally checked that in cases, a single building was >> split in three slices. I did not fix it. >> > since then I fixed a few, but I do not plan continuing to do so. I don't > come too often to Panama City. I signaled it two months ago to Kaart > (via Vigo) and I hope they will indeed "improve future edits made by > Kaart", in the meanwhile, not having seen any activity from them, and > since they're now editing an other aspect, again without consulting with > the local community, I moved to adding a 'fixme' tag to their most > obvious mistakes. > > > > > -- > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 17:24:23 + > From: Andy Townsend > To: talk@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > > On 05/02/2020 17:15, Dave F via talk wrote: >> On 05/02/2020 15:45, Mario Frasca wrote: >>> hi all, >>> >>> I am in no positi
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
in the united states we call this a strip mall if you are walking on the outside one building sharing the same roof but divided by fire walls, or just a mall if you are walking on the inside with multiple buildings in a central core. as i see it that is not the problem it is the abuse of the polygon, mappers can not leave things be they have to draw everything in sight and most are not local but tracing from the satellite view. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Polygons like everything else there needs to check and balances an editor in chief or an editorial board someone in charge, someone that can come in, takeover, un till then OSM is fake news. From: Mario Frasca Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 9:45 AM To: OSM Talk Subject: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" hi all, I sort of moved to Panama. I am trying to find local mappers wanting to discuss issues, help take decisions, document decisions, and validate data. it's been a hard task, and it's not the only hard task here in Panama: time and again I find tons of mistakes added by people who, mostly in good faith, won't take responsibility for their edits. when it's isolated editors, I comment on their edits, or ask for a temporary block if they keep adding dubious data without reacting to comments. when it's an organization, it can be easier, or very much more complicated. one common practice, the one I wish to discuss here, is something done by Kaart editors: splitting a building into as many slices as the amount of commercial activities within the building. I am in no position to take care of the amount of instances of this practice, and fix them, nor do I lead a group of editors who can fix such an amount of issues, and definitely not while these issues keep streaming into the database, and the stream has very variable intensity. I've signalled it to their editors, or to their leaders, but apparently when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to review. I've asked them to alert the community *before* they start each such activities, but I did not manage to get a commitment. apparently also Kaart (as HOT) does not take any notice of the Organized Edits directive. I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme'. maybe public shame will do the job. hints? tank you and best regards, Mario Frasca (mariotomo) this is what I'm talking about: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Qqh one more things that make this situation even more complicated, is that many of these ways have shop:yes, which sounds like "I'm too lazy to investigate the details, please someone does it for me", which I did in one shopping area, putting shop names in a web search, and fix the type of the shop, before realizing the dimension of the problem. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/748685987 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35874422 (one of the many instances of expressing doubts and not getting a reply) (people participating to organized edits, who later disappear from OSM, and leaving you with the doubt whom to contact.) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" - fake building for several shops inside one building
5 Feb 2020, 21:06 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com: > Hello, > >> I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme' >> > > nice to highlight the issue. > but why not fixing it ? > In case of systematic mass edit, (especially by paid mappers) it may take unreasonable effort to fix it. And as I understood the main problem is lack of communication and ignoring reports of systematic mistakes.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" - fake building for several shops inside one building
On 05/02/2020 20:06, marc marc wrote: nice to highlight the issue. but why not fixing it ? part of the reason for that was described a decade ago by Andy Allan: https://blog.gravitystorm.co.uk/2009/11/10/the-pottery-club/ That was talking about imports, but "poor commercial mapping in the hope that the community will tidy it up" causes the same problem. Commercial mappers may be paid not for quality, but for quantity, and the sheer number of individual mappers can overwhelm local mappers' attempts to check their edits. See for example this list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Grab#Grab_Data_Team . Some of the problems that that led to can be seen at https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64075 , also in that forum see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=67707 for comments relevant to the edits in Panama too. "Having lots of paid mappers" doesn't necessarily mean "will ignore local suggestions" - I can think of one very large group (perhaps the largest) who have been very responsive. This potential asymmetry was one of the things that lead to the Organised Editing Guidelines being created: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines , and the list at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities . Some organisations have been very open and responsive about what they were trying to do - generally these are the entries in the "Activities" table with lots of information. Some have been, how shall I put it, "less forthcoming" and had to be asked by the DWG to create an entry in that table at all. Best Regards, Andy (from the DWG) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" - fake building for several shops inside one building
On 05/02/2020 20:06, marc marc wrote: Hello, I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme' nice to highlight the issue. but why not fixing it ? As stated previously, it's not the responsibility of the person spotting errors to fix it, especially if it's been performed knowingly.. josm contourmerge pluging can do that easily. I'm sure this is a very useful plugin, But the wiki is very difficult to read. instead of 'contours' it really should say 'boundary' DaveF ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" - fake building for several shops inside one building
Hello, > I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme' nice to highlight the issue. but why not fixing it ? remove the building tag for every fake building object, add the building on the whole outer back. josm contourmerge pluging can do that easily. or, of course, contact DWG if the mapper don't try to fix his errors. any changeset comment about this ? Regards, Marc ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
On 05/02/2020 12:15, Dave F via talk wrote: Who & how did you contact them? If a Public forum, could you post a link? if email, could you copy paste exactly the replies to you? not a public forum, I wrote to VigotheCarpatian as an openstreetmap message, here's some of it: myself, on 2019-12-06 19:31 Hi Vigo, thank you for replying, this is one changeset where I commented https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35874422 that’s just an example, but not at all an isolated case. what I’ve been seeing here in Panama (the country) is that Kaart people in 2015 have been mapping individual commercial enterprises as separate buildings. two examples, in Chorrera and in Panama. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385343944 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/382714337 the whole Avenida B in Panamá has buildings which have been split like this. I have personally checked that in cases, a single building was split in three slices. I did not fix it. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/384068371/history also, please, don’t leave junk behind, like |source_1|, |shop=yes|, or even putting a building in Panamá, and writing |addr:city=Santa Ana|. one more mistake is relative to mapping landuse:retail as landuse:commercial, possibly because of the false friend Spanish “centro comercial”. (example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385055420/history) there’s very few editors in Panamá, megabytes are expensive, we can’t afford neither the workload nor the bandwidth to fix this, so I’m trying to have things fixed upstream, that is, from Kaart. you already have Vigo's answer, on 2019-12-06 23:04: Hi Mario, thank you for all the information and feedback on the work done in Panama. I have informed the team and we will use the information you gave us to improve future edits made by Kaart. Thanks again for reaching out to us. to which I answered, 2019-12-07 14:23 I’m happy you will use the information I gave you, but it is relevant that you’re speaking in plural form, that’s for the Kaart organization. Since you’re speaking for a group, where the group edits in an organized way in an area where there is a community of mappers, that puts your group (Kaart) in the position where you should consider https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines. Please do that for the future, I insist. And if you have any current activity regarding Panamá, it’s not too late to inform the local community via the wiki. As for the “… to improve future edits”, well, that’s nice, but what about what your editors left behind? I’m glad you reverted to unclassified that unclassified you had tagged as track, but there’s more drops in the sea. What about organizing a review of your past edits, involving the local community? and I got the reaction, 2019-12-09 17:10 Hello Mario, here is the wiki page of projects and places that Kaart are working in. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kaart which did not and still does not mention Panama at all. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
On 05/02/2020 17:15, Dave F via talk wrote: On 05/02/2020 15:45, Mario Frasca wrote: hi all, I am in no position to take care of the amount of instances of this practice, and fix them You shouldn't be expected to. Contributors who make errors should fix them. Agreed. I've forwarded the previous email to the DWG to create a ticket so that we can chase it up from there. I've signalled it to their editors, or to their leaders, but apparently when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to review. This sounds dodgy. Who & how did you contact them? If a Public forum, could you post a link? if email, could you copy paste exactly the replies to you? (again at the risk of sounding like a broken record) I'd recommend trying to make these comments in public, via changeset discussion comments so that: * It's clear what the problem is, and which change actually introduced the problem. * Other mappers who encounter the data or who look at services like http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=61942 can also see the problem Best Regards, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
On 05/02/2020 11:53, Andy Townsend wrote: it can sometimes be difficult to decide where one building ends and the next starts sometimes, sometimes it's clear. sometimes you walk in the area, you see the façade and you wonder how they can know the name of the shop and not have seen it's three shops in the same building, nor take note of what kind of shop it is. the whole Avenida B in Panamá has buildings which have been split like this. I have personally checked that in cases, a single building was split in three slices. I did not fix it. since then I fixed a few, but I do not plan continuing to do so. I don't come too often to Panama City. I signaled it two months ago to Kaart (via Vigo) and I hope they will indeed "improve future edits made by Kaart", in the meanwhile, not having seen any activity from them, and since they're now editing an other aspect, again without consulting with the local community, I moved to adding a 'fixme' tag to their most obvious mistakes. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
On 05/02/2020 15:45, Mario Frasca wrote: hi all, I am in no position to take care of the amount of instances of this practice, and fix them You shouldn't be expected to. Contributors who make errors should fix them. I've signalled it to their editors, or to their leaders, but apparently when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to review. This sounds dodgy. Who & how did you contact them? If a Public forum, could you post a link? if email, could you copy paste exactly the replies to you? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
good day Andy
On 05/02/2020 11:53, Andy Townsend wrote:
I also don't think that's a typical reaction from paid mappers
generally (apart from spammers of course),
can you help me understanding the following statement otherwise than
"too late"?
Hi Mario, thank you for all the information and feedback on the work
done in Panama. I have informed the team and we will use the
information you gave us to improve future edits made by Kaart. Thanks
again for reaching out to us.
(by VigotheCarpatian)
("all the information and feedback" was a list of issues, all still on
the to-do list).
now Kaart is busy fixing road classification, and the editors are
reacting to comments (they are still busy on the task), but there's been
no contact with the local community prior to starting their coordinated
edits, nor do I know where to find the description of this task.
just an example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80548506
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
Feb 5, 2020, 16:45 by ma...@anche.no: > something done by Kaart editors: > > Are they organized mappers? Are they paid mappers? > splitting a building into as many slices as the amount of commercial > activities within the building > Sound blatantly incorrect to me. You can map shop as areas within a single building area, but splitting building just because there are multiple shops there is incorrect. I am not sure how and why anyone is doing this. > but apparently when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to > review. > It is not too late to revert if they have such approach. > I've asked them to alert the community *before* they start each such > activities, but I did not manage to get a commitment. apparently also Kaart > (as HOT) does not take any notice of the Organized Edits directive. > I recommend contacting DWG. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group > I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme'. maybe public > shame will do the job. > This is not going to work. You tried contacting them and they ignored it? Escalate to DWG. > hints? > Send mail to DWG pointing to evidence of "when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to review""does not take any notice of the Organized Edits directive" and ignored changeset comments. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
On 05/02/2020 15:45, Mario Frasca wrote: ... but apparently when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to review. I don't think that that's a reasonable approach for any OSM mapper to take (whether they're working for a company or not). I also don't think that's a typical reaction from paid mappers generally (apart from spammers of course), and with a DWG hat on I've contacted many, many mappers both doing it for a job and as a hobby. An exception might be if someone has broken something that was quite complicated (perhaps an imported multipolygon forest the size of a small country) and they technically aren't able to fix it again, or there have been other edits in the mean time that might be difficult for a relatively new mapper to resolve, but "I can't be bothered" is rarely given as an excuse. On to the "whether it is a good idea to map things this way" part of the question (which might be a better fit for the tagging list): You can see examples of both approaches at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/382577754#map=19/8.97397/-79.53502 . To the southwest there are multiple nodes within one building and to the northeast there is "one building per shop". If there are multiple shops within one physical building I'd certainly map them as nodes within a building, but it can sometimes be difficult to decide where one building ends and the next starts. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/53.09756/-1.38685 in the UK is an example (not originally mapped by me) that shows shops as closed ways and buildings (that are connected, but are actually separate buildings) as closed ways, and the two don't necessarily map 1-1 with each other. This matches real life, but is a pain to maintain when (for example) a large shop shuts and opens as two smaller ones. In the Panama example even if the "buildings" northeast of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/382577754 could be considered separate (and it sounds like you're saying that it would be wrong to) presumably the walls at least should be parallel. Have you had an explanation of why they're taking this approach? > I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme'. maybe public shame will do the job. I don't think that will help here - higgledy piggledy buildings are easy to spot, and a glut of fixmes for "obvious to spot problems" will drown out existing fixmes that might not be otherwise obvious. The usual advice I'd give is (and apologies if this sounds like a broken record): * Comment politely on the changeset that introduced the problem, with a translation into a language that the mapper will understand, explaining what the problem is. * Also, if appropriate, mention it to the rest of the local community. * If they persist, repeat explaining again why it is a problem. * If that doesn't work, raise it with the Data Working Group via d...@osmfoundation.org In this case there have been a couple of questions asked of this mapper in changeset discussion comments (though not about this particular issue) - any more and with a DWG hat on I'd definitely consider drawing their attention to the fact that other people are trying to get in touch with them. Best Regards, Andy (from the DWG, but as usual here writing in a personal capacity) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
this is what I'm talking about: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Qqh one more things that make this situation even more complicated, is that many of these ways have shop:yes, which sounds like "I'm too lazy to investigate the details, please someone does it for me", which I did in one shopping area, putting shop names in a web search, and fix the type of the shop, before realizing the dimension of the problem. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/748685987 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35874422 (one of the many instances of expressing doubts and not getting a reply) (people participating to organized edits, who later disappear from OSM, and leaving you with the doubt whom to contact.) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"
hi all, I sort of moved to Panama. I am trying to find local mappers wanting to discuss issues, help take decisions, document decisions, and validate data. it's been a hard task, and it's not the only hard task here in Panama: time and again I find tons of mistakes added by people who, mostly in good faith, won't take responsibility for their edits. when it's isolated editors, I comment on their edits, or ask for a temporary block if they keep adding dubious data without reacting to comments. when it's an organization, it can be easier, or very much more complicated. one common practice, the one I wish to discuss here, is something done by Kaart editors: splitting a building into as many slices as the amount of commercial activities within the building. I am in no position to take care of the amount of instances of this practice, and fix them, nor do I lead a group of editors who can fix such an amount of issues, and definitely not while these issues keep streaming into the database, and the stream has very variable intensity. I've signalled it to their editors, or to their leaders, but apparently when an activity is closed, it's too late to ask them to review. I've asked them to alert the community *before* they start each such activities, but I did not manage to get a commitment. apparently also Kaart (as HOT) does not take any notice of the Organized Edits directive. I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme'. maybe public shame will do the job. hints? tank you and best regards, Mario Frasca (mariotomo) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
