Let me put it this way, it very easy for you to come along with your validator toll and get on your high horse and point out how trash some routing edits are... but you have no clue at all how much effort it take to get some intersections functioning as intended as per the rule of the intersection, the one you pointed out was pretty simple and was functioning 100% correctly before you touched it now it allows u-turns, you’re pointing out the tiny issue that your validator points out but what you don’t realize is that the validator doe not see the big picture either, its pretty much just pointing out conflicting restrictions which are even sometimes left in intentionally, this is not the first time ive ran into your edits but I have had enough of it, it takes a lot more knowledge and effort to get them working as intended per the rules than for you to come along with your little tool, if you personally don’t know the intended routing and can’t see any errors using the routing engine itself LEAVE IT ALONE, OSM is only meant to be edited by people with local knowledge of the areas, I put a lot of time into what I do including random routing on my gps to see what it will throw at me, I do not need to be worry about you and your tool coming along to destroy it. I am not proff reading this so sorry if there are spelling errors!
From: talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org> Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 1:33 PM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 46 Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to talk-au@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Talk-au digest..." Today's Topics: 1. iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) (Andrew Davidson) 2. Re: iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) (Andrew Davidson) 3. Re: iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) (Phil Wyatt) 4. FW: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 (Phil Wyatt) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 11:53:53 +1000 From: Andrew Davidson <thesw...@gmail.com> To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) Message-ID: <9d7c85e4-257e-f7b0-bd48-bf425c9c3...@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed On 30/4/22 00:45, Anthony Panozzo wrote: > This account is either a bot account or someone that thinks they know > more than they actually do, every single time anybody does a routing > correction this account comes along and ?fixes? it based on ?knowledge? Some terminology before we start. To be valid a turn restriction relation needs to have: 1. A way with the role "from" 2. A way with the role "to" 3. One or more "via" s that can be either a node or one or more ways 4. The members must connect in a way that you can travel When I say "broken" I mean that one of the rules is broken and when I say "knowledge" I mean I know what a valid turn restriction should be. > from the notes, let me just say I looked over some of the edit this > account does and it breaks the routing for the most part, Changeset: > 120344373 | OpenStreetMap This changeset deleted this turn restriction: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13905961 which you added in changeset 118257827 and then broke in 118293106 (it only had a node via member). When I reviewed this one I decided to delete it because it would only duplicate this turn restriction: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/14044389 which you added in changeset 119769921, if I fixed it. > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120344373> and Changeset: > 120198383 | OpenStreetMap This intersection had 15 broken turn restriction relation in it: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477255 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477256 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477257 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477258 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477260 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477261 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477263 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477268 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477269 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13557714 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761157 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761161 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761169 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761170 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13991446 You broke 14 and added one new broken relation (13991446). While I was deleting these I noticed that the intersection had some sort of cross-your-heart thing going on with added ways for turn lanes, so I simplified it to a standard traffic light box intersection: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-34.76387/138.59277 You can turn right from each arm which means we don't have to have any no-right turns. There are 4 no-left turns because each approach has a slip lane. Since it's SA and at traffic lights then there are four no u-turns to cover that. This is exactly the same routing information that was there before, but now in a simpler easier to maintain format. > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120198383#map=17/-34.76452/138.59301> > are two examples of this account breaking routing, ive been wasting my > time spending hours and hours fixing routing just for this shitty bot to > come along and fuck it all up over and over again, I would like to ask > DWG to take a real close look at this account and see if it can be > banned from any further edits under the bot edit policy or straight out > vandalism! I am not a bot. Just a mapper with overpass, the JOSM validator, the to-do plugin, and many hours of puzzling over the question of what a broken turn restriction relation was supposed to be doing. A couple of years ago I spent quite a bit of time fixing all the turn restrictions around AU, but I have to keep coming back every couple of months, as 100-200 newly broken ones get created every month. Mostly because iD will quietly break existing turn restrictions or let you create invalid ones and then upload them to OSM. I used to put changeset comments on the ones that had broken them until a user asked me how they could stop doing it and I discovered that there isn't a way to do that in iD. My fixes should not be changing any routing outcomes as they are almost all deleting turn restrictions that iD didn't clean up after a mapper reconfigured an intersection. None of the examples you have pointed to have changed the routing outcomes as I check to make sure I understand what someone was trying to map before I fix it. ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:25:31 +1000 From: Andrew Davidson <thesw...@gmail.com> To: OpenStreetMap <talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) Message-ID: <cacxr7k1ujx2wqzf5nsgxrd+6crp-upx7mpasjsvlogg5de9...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Sat, 30 Apr 2022, 11:53 Andrew Davidson, <thesw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/14044389 > > > Cut and paste error there. The existing no u-turn restriction is: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13909088 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220430/418ba850/attachment-0001.htm> ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 13:53:14 +1000 From: "Phil Wyatt" <p...@wyatt-family.com> To: "'Andrew Davidson'" <thesw...@gmail.com>, <talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) Message-ID: <000d01d85c45$d472c5e0$7d5851a0$@wyatt-family.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Many thanks for the detailed explanation -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Davidson <thesw...@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 11:54 AM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44) On 30/4/22 00:45, Anthony Panozzo wrote: > This account is either a bot account or someone that thinks they know > more than they actually do, every single time anybody does a routing > correction this account comes along and ?fixes? it based on ?knowledge? Some terminology before we start. To be valid a turn restriction relation needs to have: 1. A way with the role "from" 2. A way with the role "to" 3. One or more "via" s that can be either a node or one or more ways 4. The members must connect in a way that you can travel When I say "broken" I mean that one of the rules is broken and when I say "knowledge" I mean I know what a valid turn restriction should be. > from the notes, let me just say I looked over some of the edit this > account does and it breaks the routing for the most part, Changeset: > 120344373 | OpenStreetMap This changeset deleted this turn restriction: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13905961 which you added in changeset 118257827 and then broke in 118293106 (it only had a node via member). When I reviewed this one I decided to delete it because it would only duplicate this turn restriction: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/14044389 which you added in changeset 119769921, if I fixed it. > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120344373> and Changeset: > 120198383 | OpenStreetMap This intersection had 15 broken turn restriction relation in it: https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477255 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477256 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477257 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477258 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477260 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477261 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477263 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477268 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477269 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13557714 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761157 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761161 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761169 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761170 https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13991446 You broke 14 and added one new broken relation (13991446). While I was deleting these I noticed that the intersection had some sort of cross-your-heart thing going on with added ways for turn lanes, so I simplified it to a standard traffic light box intersection: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-34.76387/138.59277 You can turn right from each arm which means we don't have to have any no-right turns. There are 4 no-left turns because each approach has a slip lane. Since it's SA and at traffic lights then there are four no u-turns to cover that. This is exactly the same routing information that was there before, but now in a simpler easier to maintain format. > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120198383#map=17/-34.76452/13 > 8.59301> are two examples of this account breaking routing, ive been > wasting my time spending hours and hours fixing routing just for this > shitty bot to come along and fuck it all up over and over again, I > would like to ask DWG to take a real close look at this account and > see if it can be banned from any further edits under the bot edit > policy or straight out vandalism! I am not a bot. Just a mapper with overpass, the JOSM validator, the to-do plugin, and many hours of puzzling over the question of what a broken turn restriction relation was supposed to be doing. A couple of years ago I spent quite a bit of time fixing all the turn restrictions around AU, but I have to keep coming back every couple of months, as 100-200 newly broken ones get created every month. Mostly because iD will quietly break existing turn restrictions or let you create invalid ones and then upload them to OSM. I used to put changeset comments on the ones that had broken them until a user asked me how they could stop doing it and I discovered that there isn't a way to do that in iD. My fixes should not be changing any routing outcomes as they are almost all deleting turn restrictions that iD didn't clean up after a mapper reconfigured an intersection. None of the examples you have pointed to have changed the routing outcomes as I check to make sure I understand what someone was trying to map before I fix it. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 14:00:38 +1000 From: "Phil Wyatt" <p...@wyatt-family.com> To: "OSM-Au" <talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: [talk-au] FW: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 Message-ID: <001301d85c46$dc381a40$94a84ec0$@wyatt-family.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Phil Wyatt <p...@wyatt-family.com> Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 2:00 PM To: 'Anthony Panozzo' <pan...@outlook.com> Subject: RE: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 Hi Anthony, There are multiple tools out there for finding 'errors' in OSM data and many people use them to keep the OSM data up to date. You might also like to share the OSM software that you are using on your vehicle GPS as it may turn out that it doesn't handle relations or routing of some situations. Cheers - Phil From: Anthony Panozzo <pan...@outlook.com <mailto:pan...@outlook.com> > Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 10:35 AM To: Phil Wyatt <p...@wyatt-family.com <mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> > Subject: RE: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 The biggest issue I have with this account is that they don't find routing errors on their own, this person stalks other peoples edits and "correcs" them using knowledge as their source, I find these routing errors 100% myself in real world situations, I have been editing and using OSM on my car gps for many years, this user edits other users edits based on no knowledge of the intersection at all, having a user like this should put anyone off making any routing edits when this person randomly edits 10 different intersections in 10 minutes and says they have knowledge. From: Phil Wyatt <mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 9:44 AM To: 'Anthony Panozzo' <mailto:pan...@outlook.com> ; talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: RE: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 Hi Anthony (slice0), Can I suggest the best way to get some resolution is to actually spell out in a changeset comment why you think the change made by Swavu is incorrect. That way everyone gets to learn from 'conflicts'. I also suggest you restrain your language or you may also face the wrath of the DWG. PS Swavu is not a bot. Cheers - Phil (tastrax) From: Anthony Panozzo <pan...@outlook.com <mailto:pan...@outlook.com> > Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 12:46 AM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 User TheSwavu This account is either a bot account or someone that thinks they know more than they actually do, every single time anybody does a routing correction this account comes along and "fixes" it based on "knowledge" from the notes, let me just say I looked over some of the edit this account does and it breaks the routing for the most part, Changeset: 120344373 | OpenStreetMap <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120344373> and Changeset: 120198383 | OpenStreetMap <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120198383#map=17/-34.76452/138.5930 1> are two examples of this account breaking routing, ive been wasting my time spending hours and hours fixing routing just for this shitty bot to come along and fuck it all up over and over again, I would like to ask DWG to take a real close look at this account and see if it can be banned from any further edits under the bot edit policy or straight out vandalism! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220430/d0f732e2/attachment.htm> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ------------------------------ End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 46 ****************************************
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
