Heren, Gezien er begin dit jaar nog veel wegen waren die nog niet omgezet waren van 90 naar 70 in de OSM dB, hebben wij de vrijheid genomen om deze inderdaad zelf op te nemen; Zie https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/2017-February/009670.html voor de originele dataset op welke de wijzigingen gebeurd zijn. Deze dataset werd ons aangeleverd door AWV inderdaad. http://application-mapserver.be-mobile.biz/ms?map=/maps/public-osm/configs/speedReduction.map&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetCapabilities
Voor alle feedback cf aanpassingen van Ilona, graag terugkoppelen naar mij. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Ilona_S/history Ik vermoed dat de 'fout' in volgende remark kan zitten; Opgelet: Wegsegmenten waar de maximaal toegelaten snelheid '90' blijft, zijn niet opgenomen in dit bestand met uitzondering van deze in de provincie Antwerpen. Dat maakt dat de 'fout' zich zou beperken tot regio Antwerpen. Indien gewenst kan ook de originele shapeFile aangeleverd worden, mocht dit makkelijker werken. Mvg, Brecht -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: talk-be-requ...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-be-requ...@openstreetmap.org] Verzonden: maandag 15 mei 2017 18:50 Aan: talk-be@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Talk-be Digest, Vol 113, Issue 18 Send Talk-be mailing list submissions to talk-be@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to talk-be-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at talk-be-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Talk-be digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: 90->70 in Vlaanderen (Glenn Plas) 2. (no subject) (Marc Gemis) 3. Re: 90->70 in Vlaanderen (Glenn Plas) 4. Re: 90->70 in Vlaanderen (joost schouppe) 5. Re: 90->70 in Vlaanderen (Glenn Plas) 6. Re: 90->70 in Vlaanderen (joost schouppe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 15:53:55 +0200 From: Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90->70 in Vlaanderen Message-ID: <5919b2f3.3080...@byte-consult.be> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 changeset ID ? Dit is altijd zo frustrerend... doe-maar-op-mappers met ik-heb-mijn-eigen-regels voor OSM Glenn 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 > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 15:59:08 +0200 From: Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be@openstreetmap.org> Subject: [OSM-talk-be] (no subject) Message-ID: <CAJKJX-SxxBAx98uWm8xGW=f45yjzhjx5udm_sze2pc89uub...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" welke van de tientallen ? :-) http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Ilona_S/history N16 is al gecorrigeerd, tenminste waar ik zeker weet dat het nog 90 is. Via Joost te weten gekomen dat dit BeMobile is die AWV data gebruikt. We hebben nu rechtstreeks contact opgenomen met hen. Er is hier ook wat op de mailing list gepasseerd bij de vorige 90->70 discussie m. 2017-05-15 15:53 GMT+02:00 Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be>: > changeset ID ? > > Dit is altijd zo frustrerend... doe-maar-op-mappers met > ik-heb-mijn-eigen-regels voor OSM > > Glenn > > > 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 >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 16:04:09 +0200 From: Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90->70 in Vlaanderen Message-ID: <5919b559.7030...@byte-consult.be> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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 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 > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 17:02:55 +0200 From: joost schouppe <joost.schou...@gmail.com> To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90->70 in Vlaanderen Message-ID: <cao2_g7kv6ytetyj7f0wqmiqnmdmafptyopjxkpyyagsvpj9...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Glenn, calm down :) 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! 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. 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. 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>: > 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=10/51.0953/4.30 > 39 > > > 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 > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > -- Joost Schouppe OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20170515/38b019ba/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 17:50:01 +0200 From: Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> To: talk-be@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90->70 in Vlaanderen Message-ID: <5919ce29.7010...@byte-consult.be> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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.ht > ml > 1: > http://www.geopunt.be/kaart?type=dataset&data=%5B%7B%27type%27%3A%27WM > S%27%2C%27url%27%3A%27https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mercator.vlaanderen.be%2Fraadp > leegdienstenmercatorpubliek%2Fows%3FSERVICE%3DWMS%26service%3DWMS%26ve > rsion%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%20Sne > lheidsregimes%20langs%20de%20genummerde%20wegen%20in%20beheer%20van%20 > AWV%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=10/51.0953/4.3 > 039> > > > 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> > > > > ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 18:49:00 +0200 From: joost schouppe <joost.schou...@gmail.com> To: OpenStreetMap Belgium <talk-be@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90->70 in Vlaanderen Message-ID: <cao2_g7kankvkszy_ynfjod4mxaam+dewoxtcya51jd9zn0k...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Glenn, I'm not sure we should fix this ourselves. I think we can ask Be-mobile to fix this. But maybe a revert is in order. Be-mobile didn't discuss this in advance, but just let us know they did afterwards. I personally failed in following this up, so now we have this mess on the mailing list. First steps are always hard, and when you try to do too much in your first step, you can have a big mess up. Let's not judge them too much, and try to make this a learning experience, not a first and last step. But there is definitely a lot of learning to be had! I can't judge the quality of their WMS, as I can only get it to tell me "something is wrong here", not what needs to happen. The base data from AWV seems to be correct, at least in the case Marc found. So I would guess it's a question of instructions gone wrong. In many cases there is both AWV data (which the people at AWV were quite confident about) and Mapillary traffic signs, so we do have some material to work with. It would be nice to have an idea of the size of the problem, so we can give more info to Be-Mobile. Of course we need a quick solution, but I think it would be best if a larger problem caused by a paid mapper doesn't need to be fixed by a volunteer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20170515/a3f029e8/attachment.html> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ------------------------------ End of Talk-be Digest, Vol 113, Issue 18 **************************************** _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
