On 15-05-17 17:02, joost schouppe wrote: > Glenn, calm down :) it's not because I say fubar that I'm not calm. this is e-mail, totally lacking the ability to convey emotional states, not counting ALL-CAPS messages, I said fubar because now we need to audit all changes. Not for the problem, but for the work I foresee in assessing the impact of this.
> In fact, Be-Mobile announced on this list that they had made a WMS with > the roads that needed changing because of the 90->70 law in Flanders > [1]. They also gave Ben and me the username of this person who did the > changes for them. But I never followed up on that. Sorry! I see a number of problems here: first of all, "we" trusted a third party -blindly- it seems. We(you) seem to have helped them from the start, which is good. conclusion: that WMS wasn't Q/A' decently before releasing it into the wild. Second problem is that this is prime example of armchair mapping making this look more like a manually executed datamerge than map editing. The third -biggest problem- is that the data seems to be wrong, at least for this road! That is in fact a huge problem when it comes to 'trust' aspect of the third=party database. I've been taking a look at some of the changes in detail and so far, I see little intelligence in it (roads with different speeds in both direction, exception made with traffic signs aren't there). But it's still unclear if they are errors or not without local knowledge, so same goes for me: I can't even tell if it is correct or not, and I don't think paper lists will determine that. It's just a search/replace from my first analysis. I could have done that with a few Overpass queries and JOSM in 30 minutes and move on. > So it is logical that all their changesets would be 90 to 70. The > question which i can't answer right now is where exactly it went wrong. > As far as I understood, they used the AWV dataset to find places to > change, and that is correct in this case [2]. Our contact at Be-Mobile > is out of office right now, so I can't tell you more right now. Ok, in context of this knowledge that doesn't really make me feel more confident now but I do understand why all changesets are like that. (same commit message all over again, instead of mentioning road names for example). > But I think we can definitely ask them to look over these changes again. > Something clearly went wrong here, but we don't know the scope of > mistakes yet, and at least we know who did this and why. indeed, the 'scope', the part that translated into 'fubar' in my initial message. We have no idea now on the impact. But I am going to take a deeper look into why some applications I've built are flagging speed problems (average maxspeeds way too high for all traffic) when compared to OSM speeds, including a traffic layer that depends on those maxspeeds on all primary/secondary roads. Perhaps I missed the announcement on which user this was going to be doing, but it would probably been a better idea to create a dedicated account indicating the owner/affiliation instead of using personal names. I could not tell this was BE-Mobile related. Glenn > > > 1: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/2017-April/009887.html > 1: > http://www.geopunt.be/kaart?type=dataset&data=%5B%7B%27type%27%3A%27WMS%27%2C%27url%27%3A%27https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mercator.vlaanderen.be%2Fraadpleegdienstenmercatorpubliek%2Fows%3FSERVICE%3DWMS%26service%3DWMS%26version%3D1.3.0%26request%3DGetMap%27%2C%27layers%27%3A%5B%7B%27id%27%3A%27tn%3Atn_snelhrg_awv%27%2C%27title%27%3A%27WMS-GetMap%20van%3A%20Snelheidsregimes%20langs%20de%20genummerde%20wegen%20in%20beheer%20van%20AWV%27%7D%5D%7D%5D > > Op 15 mei 2017 om 16:04 schreef Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be > <mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be>>: > > Ok, I found her. omg. she's dedicated to changing all 90's to 70's. > This is really fubar imho. > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Ilona_S/history#map=10/51.0953/4.3039 > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Ilona_S/history#map=10/51.0953/4.3039> > > > On 15-05-17 12:24, Marc Gemis wrote: > > Ik heb dit weekend de N16 tussen Willebroek en Temse terug naar 90 > > km/h gebracht. > > Een overijverige mapster heeft volgens mij gewoon alle 90 door 70 > > vervangen zonder lokale kennis. > > Misschien best eens in je eigen buurt kijken, want ze heeft behoorlijk > > wat wijzigingen gedaan > > > > Op mijn Nederlandstalige changeset comment, reageerde ze in het > Engels. > > > > mvg > > > > m > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-be mailing list > > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be> > > > > _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
