Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Kevin Kenny]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Kevin Kenny
 wrote:
> With that in hand, I can probably finish up New Jersey this week.

Noo Joisey is done.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Paul Norman]

On 10/12/2017 6:54 PM, Nick Hocking wrote:


Should we (in OSM) put what the user will probably search for, the 
correect (hypothetically) Redwil or should we put the "ground truth" 
(REED WILL) which is what the user will see if he acually ever makes 
it to that location.


Although this has been resolved as a misreading of the site, in this 
case, correct is the ground truth.


For OSM, the data from the city is not authoritative. Ground truth is.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Nick Hocking]

AAAH - all my questions are answered.

The City of Austin's use of google base map has "fooled" me into thinking
that the map data was theirs rather than googles. If I click on the "blue
line" then I see the actual City of Austin data and indeed it is "REED WILL
DRIVE".

Damm - So I have actually just gone and put in a google mistake into OSM.
Easily fixed tonight and I will check any other roads that I have "fixed"
in the last two days.

Ok - so after all this, the only error was in the google data, which is no
great surprise.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Nick Hocking]

Clifford wrote
"Looking at the data from
Austin, the road should be name Reed Will Drive."

Hi Clifford.
Which site did you find the authoritive data for Austin from?  (Tiger has
nothing and is not authorative anyway, as far as I can tell)

The Cit of Austin  site
https://data.austintexas.gov/Locations-and-Maps/Street-Segment/t4fe-kr8c
has "Redwill Drive"

CAPCOG
http://regional-open-data-capcog.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/roads-2015
has "Reed Will Drive"

There is annecdotal evidence that the street signs have (or maybe had)
"Reed Will Drive"

So, firstly I think we need to find out what the street signs say
currently. Then we need to contact all authoritive holders of this data to
clarify what name is correct and to ensure all occurrences are fixed as
necessary.

In the meantime what would you suggest is the best action to take?
Lets say the street sign is wrong (REED WILL) and the correct data is City
of Austin's Redwil.

Should we (in OSM) put what the user will probably search for, the correect
(hypothetically) Redwil or should we put the "ground truth" (REED WILL)
which is what the user will see if he acually ever makes it to that
location.

PS - I have just noticed that the City of Austin website has an attribution
of "Map data @2017 Google"
Does this mean that the displayed names are from google rather than City of
Austin and therefore not usable by us.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Clifford Snow]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Nick Hocking 
wrote:

> Nathan wrote
>
>
> has the road listed as REED WILL and with a type of DR.  I've been told
> that this is an acceptable source or road names,
>
>
> Maybe somebody could drive past this road and report back what the actual
> street signs do say. If they do say "Reed Will" then I will try to contact
> the Austin authorities to clarify the situation.
>

Nathan,
I haven't been following this discussion closely. Looking at the data from
Austin, the road should be name Reed Will Drive. The pre_dir and pre_type
are null. Plus the full_name is shown as Reed Will Dr.

Let me apologize in advance if I misunderstood your question.

Clifford


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Rihards]

On 2017.10.13. 01:15, Nick Hocking wrote:
> Nathan wrote
> "Best to stay well on the correct side of the line "**//___^
> **//___^
> Ok - point taken.

yes, google so far has not flat out denied permission, but their terms
of service would make data not usable in some countries.
it's safer to do a bit of an extra effort now to avoid data removal later.

> Did I mention that at the location I posted (using OSM) the CAPCOG
> website (roads dataset)
> 
> http://regional-open-data-capcog.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/roads-2015
> 
> has the road listed as REED WILL and with a type of DR.  I've been told
> that this is an acceptable source or road names, 

it might be, cannot comment

> Maybe somebody could drive past this road and report back what the
> actual street signs do say. If they do say "Reed Will" then I will try
> to contact the Austin authorities to clarify the situation.

they could also consider taking mapillary and/or osv images - if we had
them, this would be easily resolved ;)

as far as i know, austin has published quite a lot of data and is fairly
open. it might be possible to reach somebody there who would appreciate
feedback. definitely worth trying.
-- 
 Rihards

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Nick Hocking]

Nathan wrote
"Best to stay well on the correct side of the line "

Ok - point taken.


Did I mention that at the location I posted (using OSM) the CAPCOG website
(roads dataset)

http://regional-open-data-capcog.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/roads-2015

has the road listed as REED WILL and with a type of DR.  I've been told
that this is an acceptable source or road names,


Maybe somebody could drive past this road and report back what the actual
street signs do say. If they do say "Reed Will" then I will try to contact
the Austin authorities to clarify the situation.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Kevin Kenny]

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
>
> A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
> information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
> ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
> avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
> plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
> "delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)

Thanks for taking care of this. Could I make a suggestion for future work
of this kind: add a note:redaction (or some similar key) with value
identifying the particular redaction that the object belongs to? At Max's
suggestion, I was doing Overpass queries with the set of way ID's
looking for ones that were still last modified by 'woodpeck_repair',
but I realize that if the ways had an identifiable tag, I could easily
hack up a reusable script to say, "give me the next object from
this redaction" - and remove the tag when the object is re-uploaded.
Simply having a tag like "note:redaction=chdr_20171008" on
the redacted way would do it.

I may be too much of an old woman here, worrying about identifying
objects from the wrong repair. It appears that for this particular
incident,
way(newer:"2017-10-07T00:00:00Z")(user:"woodpeck_repair")({{bbox}});
is a perfectly workable Overpass query for "tell me the work to do
in this particular bbox".

With that in hand, I can probably finish up New Jersey this week.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Comparing Tiger 2017 dataset with OSM in a automatedway.

[Mike N]

On 10/12/2017 9:52 AM, Ian Dees wrote:

The vast majority of roads seem to be correctly missing from OSM.


 Along that line of thought - for cases where local government data is 
not open, I'd find it useful to detect where a name changed in TIGER 
from previous year, or a road was added.


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Davis Senior High School, California

[David Kewley]

I've just now sent an email through the school's portal to Mr. Birdsall,
asking whether he can help. I live in California, and have met folks from
Davis, but don't have enough of a personal connection to go a more direct
route.

David


On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:40 AM, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> Among rather more serious problems (smoke from the Napa wildfires) Davis
> Senior High School is home to some Pokemon fans who don't like doing their
> homework. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23646951/history has been
> changed a number of times to a park labelled "Please let us drop tests Mr.
> Birdsall".
>
> I'm sending this mail to the list on the off chance that someone here may
> know someone there - a quiet word from a friend would be a nicer approach
> than an "official" email from OSM.  What'd be great is if we can convert
> the mapper(s) concerned into mapping things that actually exist rather than
> adding fake Pokemon parks called "Hi Albert".
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group
>
> PS: In case anyone wonders "why don't you just IP block them", some of the
> edits are from iPhones, so that wouldn't be an option here (and probably
> wouldn't be proportionate even if that wasn't the case).  Also, while some
> of the edits may seem to suggest the name of one student, I wouldn't assume
> that that person is a perpetrator - they may be just the victim of a kind
> of joe-job.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Comparing Tiger 2017 dataset with OSM in a automatedway.

[Badita Florin]

I started processing, State by State, the Tiger 2017 dataset, because i get
less errors from overpass this way then if i process in bulk of 10 states.

The first state is Alabama.It took around 5 hours to complete,and it shows
over 20.000 possible ways that are not added in OSM.
The total length of the ways is 5042 km, or 3133 miles.
The xml size is 36Mb, and can be found in this folder.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B7aOUf0DFRnLU3hUWFNuS05JS2c?
usp=sharing

There are 5 35x35 miles tiles missing from the data.

Be mindful that this is the raw output, and even if Tiger 2017 is better
then older versions, there are still a lot of bad data in Tiger.

I expect more then 50% of the data to not be good for mapping into OSM.
Also, you can filter this data-set and keep just the road with the names,
that could be more important roads compared to the ones that don`t have a
name.

@joe, regarding the dataset for the twin cities, if you can create/provide
a translation file for the shapefile, i can run it and post the results in
the folder.

Some examples here

https://github.com/ToeBee/ogr2osm-translations








On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:

> Yes, it'd be great to do this. I started a project to track open road
> centerlines like this on GitHub here: https://github.com/osmla
> b/centerlines
>
> In theory, we could download that data and then do the same process using
> the presumably higher quality road data.
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Joe Sapletal 
> wrote:
>
>> This is really cool.  Can I suggest for the Twin Cities metro area
>> someone doing something similar with the Metro Regional Centerlines
>> Collaborative Local Centerlines (MRCC)?  I know that Dakota County hasn’t
>> submitted centerlines to Tiger in a couple of years, but will be for the
>> next update.  Not sure about the other counties though.  There very well
>> may be areas that the MRCC will be a better source than the Tiger data.
>>
>>
>>
>> https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-mr
>> cc-centerlines
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Ian Dees 
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:25 AM
>> *To: *Badita Florin 
>> *Cc: *talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap 
>> *Subject: *Re: [Talk-us] Comparing Tiger 2017 dataset with OSM in a
>> automatedway.
>>
>>
>>
>> It would be interesting to see what differences CYGNUS would turn up.
>> What would the output of CYGNUS be?
>>
>>
>>
>> I put together the TIGER 2017 layer that's in the editors right now. I'll
>> work on writing up how I did it later today.
>>
>>
>>
>> Basically: I used tiger-tiles (https://github.com/iandees/tiger-tiles)
>> to generate a vector tiles database with expanded road names from TIGER
>> 2017. Then I downloaded an osm-qa-tiles (https://osmlab.github.io/osm-
>> qa-tiles/) file for the United States and ran osmlint's tigerDelta (
>> https://github.com/osmlab/osmlint/tree/master/validators/tigerDelta) to
>> find the segments that had different geometry. The output was then ran
>> through Tippecanoe to generate a vector tileset and posted to Mapbox as the
>> low zoom red features.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 4:03 AM, Badita Florin 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, i wanted to ask if there will be interest around comparing TIGER 2017
>> with what we have in OSM, using CYGNUS, in a automated way.
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/36746
>>
>>
>>
>> On top of cygnus, i have developed shgp2cygnus, were you can place any
>> shapefile, any size, you provide a translation file, and, in the end, you
>> get a list with all the ways that are in the TIGER dataset, but not in OSM.
>>
>> This would be something useful for the community ?
>>
>>
>>
>> I don`t know if somebody is already doing something similar, or what is
>> the status ? Were can i read more ?
>>
>> I knoiw that the TIGER 2017 Overlay in JOSM shows in red the roads that
>> are not in OSM, but are in TIger 2017.
>>
>> But I don`t know were to read more, and if the data is accessible to
>> download directly, not just show as a WMS Layer.
>>
>>
>>
>> It will take around 7-14 days to process all USA”
>>
>>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Nathan Mills]

The problem as I understand it is less copyright violation (in the US, so long 
as what you see in Google isn't ever put into the OSM database), and more 
database licensing difficulty in the rest of the world where the law is less 
permissive and even using Google to identify possible errors in to be corrected 
by survey or open data could be legally questionable in terms of sublicensing 
the work as a whole.

Best to stay well on the correct side of the line just to avoid any possible 
issues since we have to be legal globally, not just in the US or UK or the EU.

-Nathan

On October 12, 2017 6:04:37 AM EDT, Nick Hocking  wrote:
>richlv wrote "just a quick reminder that we should try not to use
>google
>maps or
>streetview, the legal status of "just looking" is also fuzzy :)"
>
>
>Ok, so I if want to find out what a road is called, I'm not allowed to
>use
>a street directory to do this?  This would be extremely weird.
>
>If I am allowed to use a street directory for this, then I'm not
>allowed to
>tell anybody else what I think the name of the road is.  Also extremely
>weird.
>
>I don't believe that writing what someone else thinks is the name of
>the
>roads constitutes republishing their proprietary work and I'm certainly
>not
>putting this information into any other work or database. (Mind you
>IANAL).
>
>A few years ago this topic came up and IIRC Google said that it was ok
>to
>look at "some" amount of their published data but not systematically
>trawl
>through a LOT of it.
>All very subjective, I know.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Nick Hocking]

richlv wrote "just a quick reminder that we should try not to use google
maps or
streetview, the legal status of "just looking" is also fuzzy :)"


Ok, so I if want to find out what a road is called, I'm not allowed to use
a street directory to do this?  This would be extremely weird.

If I am allowed to use a street directory for this, then I'm not allowed to
tell anybody else what I think the name of the road is.  Also extremely
weird.

I don't believe that writing what someone else thinks is the name of the
roads constitutes republishing their proprietary work and I'm certainly not
putting this information into any other work or database. (Mind you IANAL).

A few years ago this topic came up and IIRC Google said that it was ok to
look at "some" amount of their published data but not systematically trawl
through a LOT of it.
All very subjective, I know.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Davis Senior High School, California

[Andy Townsend]

Among rather more serious problems (smoke from the Napa wildfires) Davis 
Senior High School is home to some Pokemon fans who don't like doing 
their homework. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23646951/history has 
been changed a number of times to a park labelled "Please let us drop 
tests Mr. Birdsall".


I'm sending this mail to the list on the off chance that someone here 
may know someone there - a quiet word from a friend would be a nicer 
approach than an "official" email from OSM.  What'd be great is if we 
can convert the mapper(s) concerned into mapping things that actually 
exist rather than adding fake Pokemon parks called "Hi Albert".


Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

PS: In case anyone wonders "why don't you just IP block them", some of 
the edits are from iPhones, so that wouldn't be an option here (and 
probably wouldn't be proportionate even if that wasn't the case).  Also, 
while some of the edits may seem to suggest the name of one student, I 
wouldn't assume that that person is a perpetrator - they may be just the 
victim of a kind of joe-job.



___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

[Rihards]

On 2017.10.11. 13:37, Nick Hocking wrote:
> Andrew wrote "I would check out the City of Austin's OpenData portal:
> https://data.austintexas.gov/Locations-and-Maps/Street-Segment/t4fe-kr8c
> 
> The license is the same (PD) as when the initial building import was
> completed, so you are good to go."
> 
> Thanks Andrew, I'm now replacing some names adding new roads and
> neighbourhoods etc.
> 
> One interesting road is Redwil Drive.
>  https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/30.23189/-97.59361
> 
> Tiger has no name, Google maps and Austin-gov have Redwill Drive but
> google street view shows both street signs as Reed Will Drive.
just a quick reminder that we should try not to use google maps or
streetview, the legal status of "just looking" is also fuzzy :)
-- 
 Rihards

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us