While it is easy to throw tons of accusations and be less civil, I will try
maintain my level of decency. I have forwarded you a snippet of one of the
emails I received (without the sender name). Also, you are welcome to
organize some independent person you trust in NYC to stop by and examine it
@mmd, thanks, inline:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 5:32 PM, mmd wrote:
> > * Added voting - experimental tasks require two users agreement to
> change DB
>
> I assumed this to be a mandatory part of the new process. However, some
> recent edits made by a "Serbian OSM Lint bot" [1]
significant problem with this discussion, and community
health in general?
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:
> On Monday 13 November 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument. [...]
>
-of-crumhenge/
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/11/2017 21:19, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
>
> Andy, as I stated before, JOSM doesn't force you to edit in your area - it
> shows you whatever data you download. OverpassT can provide it t
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/11/2017 19:36, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> > That's why I think Sophox is a much better and safer alternative to
> JOSM's autofixes.
>
> At the risk of repeating something that's been said
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote:
> On 13/11/17 01:16, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
>> if an accepted tool already does something in a certain way, and noone is
>> raising any objections to it, I think other software should follow i
t;o...@imagico.de> wrote:
> On Monday 13 November 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > Christoph, thanks for clarifying. I should have been a bit more
> > careful with that word. Could you clarify one thing - if wiki is not
> > authoritative for deprecation, than what is? "Commun
Christoph, thanks for clarifying. I should have been a bit more careful
with that word. Could you clarify one thing - if wiki is not authoritative
for deprecation, than what is? "Community consensus that something is not
to be used" has to be documented somewhere, right?
Per
as well as my most
latest post with the new tool capabilities, or just read the Sophox wiki
page and try to follow the style of Simon & Tobias - both have raised valid
objections, and in both cases it resulted in tool's improvements.
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 3:05 AM, JB <jb...@mailoo.org&g
@mmd, thanks, but I never said anything about oneway=no, and never proposed
to remove it. Andy Townsend introduced that into the discussion, and JB
elaborated on it. It is not listed in the deprecated list, nor is it in
JOSM autofixes, so it is a moot point. BTW, I did find oneway=1 ->
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 4:07 PM, ajt1...@gmail.com <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/11/2017 20:48, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
>> JB, the "layer=0 removal" is one of the JOSM validations - it
>> automatically gets suggested to anyone editing an area with tha
ev=12999#L6
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 5:56 AM, JB <jb...@mailoo.org> wrote:
> Le 08/11/2017 à 19:43, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit :
>
>> removing layer=0
>>
> Please don't. Once again, mapping is done by humans, and layer=0 IS
> sometimes useful to humans, even if computers don'
> Online communication is hard. We are missing all the context and cues from
> real life. Let's make an extra effort to get beyond the inevitable
> miscommunications when they crop up.
>
> -Mikel
>
> * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 <(415)%20283-5207> @mikel s:mikelmaron
>
.
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07.11.2017 07:29, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > Please keep discussion to constructive suggestions and ideas - they help
> > us all move forward and reach agreement.
>
> I
The tool has been thoroughly reworked, thanks to many good suggestions.
Please keep discussion to constructive suggestions and ideas - they help us
all move forward and reach agreement.
What's new:
* Tool has a new name: Sophox
* Added "reject" vote button
* Tasks can now offer multiple choices
Hehe, fun picture, and the article seems to be covering the concept well.
Simon, I don't think anyone was arguing that sanatoriums should be switched
one way or the other globally. As long as there is a clear conceptual
distinction between two types of features (whichever they are), and that
>
> On 25.10.2017 08:22, Tomas Straupis wrote:
> > Yuri later tried to change the whole theme from "osm-wikidata-sql
> > tool" to "new general qa tool" in the same thread.
>
> And now into "is local knowledge really always necessary". I'm sure
> before too long Yuri will be starting to discuss
>
> Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know
> something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that
> compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess.
>
I think this is a straw man argument - I don't think anyone is proposing to
add tags
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Tomas Straupis
wrote:
>
> Yuri later tried to change the whole theme from "osm-wikidata-sql
> tool" to "new general qa tool" in the same thread. This change gives a
> lot of confusion on what are we really talking about. Only when
>
Roland, thanks for the links. Local knowledge is very important, but lets
not make it into a sacred cow at the cost of common sense. I have not been
to every single street in New York City. I am nearly 100% sure that all
editors has edited objects that were near their location, but that they
have
disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't
> find...
>
> On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better
>> tool and disabling some of the autof
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Tomas Straupis
wrote:
> 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to
> > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in
> > Wikipedia,
Andy, both sr: and sq: languages describe the same CONCEPT - "republic of
Serbia". Both articles mention Kosovo as a territory with the special
status. So the content is the same, and both can be used to describe the
ground truth of Republic of Serbia. The articles just choose to show a
slightly
Lester, I agree with you that Wikidata should not contain an object for
everything that OSM may have. I don't believe there should be an entry for
every McDonalds on the planet, or for every artist's work that someone may
decide to include in OSM. But that's up to Wikidata contributors. Lets
Rory, I agree with you - there are always corner cases. And while we
concentrate on the geographical aspect (e.g. "somewhere there might be a
large territory where the tags mean different thing"), the corner case can
actually exist in our own neighborhood, simply because our neighbor
understood
real problems on that side, we would already know about them and
> they would be fixed very fast. Most likely by disabling the fix button for
> that particular validator warning.
>
> So if you find actual issues, please report them.
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2017-10-17 9:50 GMT+02:00
>
> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing
> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is
> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that
> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic.
&g
I agree that the tool requires some additional work. It seems almost all
of the criticism has been directed at the hypothetical "community clicking
rampage" - where the query is stored on a wiki, and some user runs it
thoughtlessly. At the same time, several skilled users have expressed their
n for each community, as different cases require different
approaches.
What do you think? Would that address the most pressing concern?
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>
wrote:
> Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > For example, RU community wants to con
, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert <osm...@michreichert.de>
wrote:
> Hi Yuri,
>
> Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM validator
> > autofixes. I don't think they were discussed, but they
80% of the
problems.
P.S. You can star any wiki page, and it will email you when the page
changes. Just like a forum.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote:
> On 16/10/17 14:02, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
>> Rory, thanks, and that's why I
Rory, thanks, and that's why I think it is a bad idea to do bot edits
without first running it through my tool. If we do a mass edit, we have to
go through a very lengthy community consensus study, which might still miss
things. Then the bot developer might still make an error that is not likely
ated edits as per the automated edits
>>> policy. A resposible developer of such a tool should inform its users
>>> that making automated edits comes with certain requirements and that
>>> not following these rules can result in changes being reverted and user
>&
Lester, the naming of this service is still a work in progress, and might
have confused a few people. My apologies for that. I do plan to create a
proper name, logo, domain name, and SSL certificate once I have some spare
time. If anyone wants to take care of that, your help is appreciated.
Tobias, as promised, a thorough response.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>
> So, the initial question is: What is the conceptual use case for such a
> tool? Where would be its place in the range of available OSM tools?
>
I think my main target is the
d with the MapRoulette team into their
> tool (or Osmose for that matter). It's all open source.
>
> That feature could look like that the creator of a MapRoulette challenge
> may optionally provide a range of possible (typical) answer options
> ("quick fixes") which are then sh
If a community has had a well established and agreed process running, which
does not create any new data issues, why should someone outside of that
community be requesting a global halt? It's not like the data is getting
worse all of a sudden, right? And their work does not prevent global
please.
>
> Especially not taking into account the wishes of the local communities
> when expressed.
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Cheerio John
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15 October 2017 at 08:04, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Andu, with al
that position, and explain why you
think it is incorrect. Perhaps we should learn from the high school debate
class? Sorry for the long email.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 6:38 AM, ajt1...@gmail.com <ajt1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 15/10/2017 11:04, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 15 Octobe
productive and beneficial to everyone involved.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:
> On Sunday 15 October 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > [...] I was following up on the Christoph Hormann's
> > idea of the "bot=no" tag, to "a
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:09 AM Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:
> On Friday 13 October 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > I would like to introduce a new quick-fix editing service. It allows
> > users to generate a list of editing suggestions using a query, review
>
rejectTag and #queryId values must consist of only the Latin
characters, digits, and underscores.
Additionally, the tool no longer allows editing above zoom 16.
Thanks!
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 12:34 AM Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Simon, thanks for the constructive critic
, and added the ability to do reject tag (as described in my
prev email).
Thanks!
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 3:45 AM Michael Reichert <osm...@michreichert.de>
wrote:
> Hi Yuri,
>
> Am 2017-10-13 um 23:25 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> > I would like to introduce a new quick-fix editin
Simon, thanks for the constructive criticism, as it allows improvements
rather than aggravation. I propose that "rejections" are saved as a new
tag, for example "_autoreject". In a way, this is very similar to the
"nobot" proposal - users reject a specific bot by hand.
_autoreject will store a
I would like to introduce a new quick-fix editing service. It allows users
to generate a list of editing suggestions using a query, review each
suggestion one by one, and click "Save" on each change if they think it's a
good edit.
For example, RU community wants to convert amenity=sanatorium
Speaking from my Wikipedia bot experience (I wrote bots and created
Wikipedia API over 10 years ago to help bots):
Bots were successful in Wikipedia because all users felt empowered. Users
could very easily see what the bot edited, fix or undo bot edits, and
easily communicate with the bot
I like the "bot=no" flag, or a more specific one for a given field -
"name:en:bot=no" - as long as those flags are not added by a bot :)
Would it make sense, judging how wikidata* tags have been mostly auto-added
by iD, as well as user's bot efforts, including my own, to treat wikidata
explicitly
,
these are the main usecases by our data consumers.
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:25 AM Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>
wrote:
> Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> OpenStreetMap takes and has always taken a whiter-than-white view of
> copyright. We aim to provide a dataset that anyone can u
While I have nothing against pausing bulk wikidata additions for a month,
we should be very clear here:
* several communities use bots to maintain and inject these tags, e.g.
Israel. Should they pause their bots?
* If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban
for that
Martin, while it is fascinating to learn about Aldi, its history, and
possible ways to organize information about it, isn't it a moot point for
our discussion? We are talking about Wikipedia, and how we link to it.
There is only one Aldi Wikipedia article that can be connected to:
* German
com> wrote:
> On 02/10/2017 02:56, Paul Norman wrote:
>
>> On 10/1/2017 5:39 PM, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>>
>>> Lastly, if the coordinates are different, you may not copy it from OSM
>>> to Wikidata because of the difference in the license.
>>>
>>
>
>
> I will repeat that this is not something which COULD be done, this
> comparison is something, what IS ACTUALLY DONE and has been done for
> years.
Tomas, this is what I understand from what you are saying:
* You download a geotagging wikidata dump and generate a table with
latitude,
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Tomas Straupis
wrote:
> > Tomas, you claimed that "It adds NO value." This is demonstrably wrong.
> You
> > are right that the same fixing was done for years. But until wikidata
> tag,
> > there was no easy way to FIND them.
>
> There
John, I guess it is always good to talk as a data scientist - with numbers
and facts. Here's why matching by coordinates would not work. This query
calculates the distance between the OSM nodes, and the coordinates that
Wikidata has for those nodes. I only looked at nodes, because ways and
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 8:15 PM, john whelan wrote:
> Since an OSM object has lat and long value and it appears that wiki
> whatever also has one the entries can be linked.
>
Not so. The data is very often different between wikipedia, wikidata, and
OSM. Also, the same
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Tomas Straupis <tomasstrau...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 2017-10-01 20:04 GMT+03:00 Yuri Astrakhan:
> >> 2. Its not a WORK to automatically update one osm tag according to
> another
> >> osm tag (anybody can do it online/locally/etc). It
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Tomas Straupis
wrote:
> I guess the point is that:
> 1. Its ok to play with some pet-tag like wikidata
>
100 % agree
> 2. Its not a WORK to automatically update one osm tag according to another
> osm tag (anybody can do it
a
good way to do it.
Linking to Wikipedia with the page titles is bad. It is not stable.
Wikidata tags fixes that. No other claim is being made here.
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 5:06 AM, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:
> On Sunday 01 October 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> >
Verifiability is critical to OSM success, but it does not mean it must only
be verifiable by visiting the physical location. Tags like "wikipedia",
"wikidata", "url", "website" and some IDs cannot be verified that way. You
must visit some external website to validate. Stopping by Yellowstone
I have been fixing nodes that have wikipedia but no wikidata tags [1], and
even the first two randomly picked nodes had identical problem - article
was renamed (twice!) without leaving redirects - node 1136510320
Try it yourself - run the query and see what the it points to.
[1]
>
> > Specifying Q125054 is the same as specifying "Aldi". If needed/wanted,
> it could be replaced with the more specific wikidata entry like Aldi Nord.
>
> no, it’s not the same, because this wikidata object suggests that there is
> one company, Aldi GmbH & Co. KG, with 2 seats, and one logo.
>
That's exactly what we are trying to do. Add another tag --
brand:wikidata=Q550258
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 4:10 PM, yvecai wrote:
> Excuse me, but what does wikidata do in this discussion ?
> If brand=wendy is different tham brand=wendy, and if somebody has a
> problem with
Martin, you cannot make a general claim based on a single value. Users can
enter "Aldi", or "Aldi Nord" or "Aldi Sud". With different capitalization
and dashes, and with or without dots, and god knows what other creative
ways to misspell it. Specifying Q125054 is the same as specifying "Aldi".
If
>
> That formed no part of the early discussions on how wikidata should
> work? I bowed out when the discussions were going down a path I did not
> find to be at all useful. The current offering is certainly a lot more
> 'organised' than those original discussions.
Getting the initial points
Marc, I think you are confusing the goal and the means to get there. I
agree - the goal is to be able to globally find all Wendy's, so that when I
travel, I still can search for familiar brands. So the same brand should
have the same ID everywhere. That ID can be either textual or numeric.
Both
ing an external reference that explains what the
> tag is? Really? This is not a joke?
>
> OSM is sick, please somebody call a doctor.
> Yves
>
>
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think we should re-start with the defi
Lester, first and foremost, Wikidata is a system to connect the same
Wikipedia articles in different languages. The "read this article in
another language" links on the left side comes from Wikidata. Wikidata has
developed beyond this initial goal, but it remains the only way to identify
I think we should re-start with the definition of the problems we are
(hopefully) trying to solve, or else we might end up too far in the
existential realm, which is fun to discuss, but should be left for another
thread.
* Problem #1: In my analysis of OSM data, wikipedia tags quickly go stale
Here is a query that finds all wikidata IDs frequently used in
"brand:wikidata", and shows OSM objects whose "wikidata" points to the
same. I would like to replace all such wikidata/wikipedia tags with the
corresponding brand:wikidata/brand:wikipedia. Most of them are in India,
but there are some
are
> external IDs. Not human readable, they cannot be entered 'by hand' nor
> verified on the ground.
> Once you accept them in OSM, you can't really complain about bots.
>
> Yves (who still think such UIDs are only needed for the lack of good query
> tools).
>
>
>
&
>
> > p.s. OSM is a community project, not a programmers project, it's about
> > people, not software :-)
>
> It's both. OSM is first and foremost is a community, but the result of
our effort is a machine-readable database. We are not creating an
encyclopedia that will be casually flipped
resource we could get.
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Sarah Hoffmann <lon...@denofr.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:53:03PM -0400, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > According to Martijn (of MapRoulette fame), there is no way a challenge
> can
> > link to object IDs. MapRou
, Mark Wagner <mark+...@carnildo.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:11:52 -0400
> Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > At the moment, there are nearly 40,000 OSM objects whose wikipedia
> > tag does not match their wikidata tag. Most of them a
data, they will
> take some form of ownership and maintain the data and that is more
> beneficial in the long term than an automated quick fix now.
>
> m.
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > According to Martijn
Marc, thanks. I was under the assumption that talk is the global community
- as it is the most generic in the list, unlike talk-us and
talk-us-newyork. Does it meany that any global proposal would require
talking to hundreds of communities independently, making it impossible to
coordinate,
.
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> or via Osmose ?
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > what about a Maproulette task ?
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Yuri Astr
At the moment, there are nearly 40,000 OSM objects whose wikipedia tag does
not match their wikidata tag. Most of them are Wikipedia redirects, whose
target is the right wikipedia article. If we are not ready to abandon
wikipedia tags just yet (I don't think we should ATM), I think we should
fix
Since this thread had not received any new discussion in the past 4 days, I
assumed all points were answered and proceeded as planned, per mechanical
edit policy. Yet, after I have added all the nodes and moved on to
relations, I have been blocked by Andy Townsend with the following message.
I
>
> And vice versa: I always wonder how usable a map in Latin alphabet is for
> Chinese or Russian speakers.
Cannot speak for Chinese, but in Russia, Latin alphabet was taught at the
very early age in school. I think that drawing a map with local names in
Latin font should not cause too many
>
> people fixing WD won’t necessarily check if their fixes work well with
> OSM. Maybe we should include versions in our WD tags?
> I’ve seen OSM objects linked from WD, are there people monitoring changes
> to linked objects?
>
Yes, that's what the Wikidata+OSM service is for. It allows
an OSM itself?
>
>
> That is nice for MB, but problematic in more than one way for OSM.
>
Please elaborate, I know of at least one more company that is actively
doing that. Sigh, another side topic :D
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:
> [
Also, there is a general country subdivision project with plenty of
information and current status. I'm pretty sure OSM community has a lot of
good info to share:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Country_subdivision
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriast
>
> Don't assume such cases are just a freak anomaly - they are not. OSM
> and wikidata are two very different projects which developed in very
> different contexts. Just another example: For most cities and larger
> towns (at least in Germany) there exists an admin_level 6/8 unit with
> the
and how to reduce the overlap. Keeping
duplicates in sync is always harder than to let the tools do their data
merging work if needed.
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Tobias, agree 100%, thanks.
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:14 PM
Tobias, agree 100%, thanks.
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 20.09.2017 17:02, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> > It is best to regard the wikidata and wikipedia tags in OSM as 'related
> > features' rather than identical objects.
>
> We shouldn't
>
> What will inevitably happen if you automatically add wikidata tags is
> that existing errors in either OSM (in form of incorrect wikipedia
> tags) or in wikidata (in form of incorrect connections to wikipedia
> articles) will get duplicated.
>
Christoph, a valid point. Yet the duplicate would
Such an awesome discussion, thanks!
* https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:GoToLinkedPage can already be used
to open a Wikipedia page when you only have a Wikidata ID. It even accepts
a list of wiki sites. For example, this link automatically opens the wiki
page for Q3669 in the first
>
>
> > This way, we will be able to quickly find all the objects that are
> > problematic with the Wikidata+OSM service. For example, thanks to the
> > community, we already fixed over 600 incorrect links to wiki
> disambiguations
> > pages, and this will find many more of them. We will be able
There is now a relatively small number of OSM nodes and relations
remaining, that have wikipedia, but do not have wikidata tags. iD editor
already automatically adds wikidata to all new edits, so finishing up the
rest automatically seems like a good thing to do, as that will allow many
new quality
Hi, I would still highly advise putting it into git, because
* it's easier to discover by others, code search, etc
* it is far easier to propose changes, discuss them, track who submitted
what, etc
* it is easier to fork to try different things, and for others to see your
forks and possibly adapt
ct has a semicolon separated list of wikidata
> items in for example subject:wikidata? A statue with more than one person
> in it, for example?
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2017-09-18 7:28 GMT+02:00 Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>:
>
>> The "not yet fully named" s
The "not yet fully named" service is now accessible directly from JOSM -
just like OT. Simply install or update Wikipedia plugin, and it will show
up in the download data screen (expert mode).
Documentation:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata%2BOSM_SPARQL_query_service#Using_from_JOSM
> wrote:
> SparklyMapData or SparklyDataMap
>
> 2017-09-17 23:46 GMT+02:00 Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>:
>
>> One thing we should consider is the domain name. I doubt we can afford
>> woq.com :)
>>
>> These names were proposed
>> woq
before fixing the first list)
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> One thing we should consider is the domain name. I doubt we can afford
> woq.com :)
>
> These names were proposed
> woq 2
> wdoqs
> wdosm
> woqs
> q936
m> a écrit :
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> How does this relate to the new draft trademark policy?
>>
>> I can't tell from the draft policy, but I believe that OSM at least is
>> a protected mark, not sure about osm.
>>
>> But I do think Simone Poole asked the co
The new service is getting more and more usage, but it lacks the most
important thing - a good name. So far my two choices are:
* wikosm
* wikidosm
Suggestions? Votes? The service combines Wikidata and OpenStreetMap
databases, and uses SPARQL (query language) to search it, so might be good
to
I just wrote a simple query to help finding all wikidata objects next to a
given OSM object. Also, it is far better to delete a bad
Wikipedia/Wikidata tags than to keep the incorrect ones. Thanks for all
the help!!!
Now all disambig-broken points on a map. Click the point to fix it.
http://tinyurl.com/ya6htp9f
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thanks! Worry not, I just added more for fixing, by extracting them from
> Wikipedia tag using the &qu
kidata ?wd ;
> osmt:wikipedia ?wpTag .
>
> ?wd wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q4167410 .
>
> FILTER( STRSTARTS(STR(?wpTag), 'https://fr.wikipedia'))
> SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "fr" . }
> }
> LIMIT 100
>
> # (replace &quo
i <higa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Yuri,
>
> Thanks for offering the tool for checking.
> I corrected 5 of "ja" ones.
>
> Shu Higashi
>
> 2017-09-10 2:58 GMT+09:00, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com>:
> > Fabrizio, the easiest way to fix both
101 - 200 di 225 matches
Mail list logo