Hi, I like your idea.
Just a week ago, the user Gassol also edited tracks in Hamburg, Germany, and he used bad, old and blurry imagery (Bing). A lot of his edited tracks aren't even visible there, because of trees or just bad image quality. I talked to him and he isn't a local person, just makes edits in quite random places and thinks that obviously (see below) wrong data is better than no data. I am a local mapper and our latest local imagery already shows, that most of his edits are false (example: He added "tracktype=grade4" on a way with "surface=paved" which looks on the latest imagery also very grade1-like). I checked about ten of his edits from home and only 3 looked plausible as far as the imagery showed. I probably will revert his Hamburg-specific changes but maybe you want to check and revert his other edits too? Those bad armchair-tags, which are mostly wrong, are as good as random values [0]: Those tags are completely useless. Removing those obviously wrong tags is a good idea IMHO. Hauke [0] 3/10 are plausible and maybe 2/10 are actually correct, which is mathematically exactly as good as a random tracktype-tag On 18.07.20 12:53, Michael Reichert wrote: > Hi, > > while reviewing changes in my local area, I discovered that user Modest7 > has been adding tracktype=* tags to lots of highway=track at various > locations. I asked him what sources he used apart from the satellite > imagery mentioned in the imagery_used=* tag of his changesets. See > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87236896 for a discussion with him. > > I do not believe that one can add reliable tracktype=* information from > satellite imagery without having some ground truth knowledge in order to > know how to interpret the imagery in that region. Adding estimated > tracktype=* does not help OSM on the long term. People how rely on the > information (e.g. some wanting to drive or cycle on that track) are > disappointed about this low-quality OSM data. Mappers who decide where > to map assume these roads to be mapped properly. IMHO, adding > fixme=resurvey tracktype will not improve it. Data consumers usually do > not use tags like fixme=* In the case of imports (another type of mass > editing), we say that an import must not add fixme=* to cover > shortcomings of the data to be imported because they usually do not get > fixed in a reasonable time. Therefore, I plan to revert these changes. > > Modest7 does not seem to realise that estimating tracktype from > satellite imagery is not doing a service to OSM. I am currently > preparing a revert of all additions of surface=* and tracktype=* by him > he uploaded since 1 January 2020 [1]. The revert will only edit tags, > geometry will stay unchanged. I revert changes on surface as well > because that's not very different to tracktype except that it applies to > other types of roads as well. > > The countries which will be affected are: > Germany > Denmark > Turkey > United States > Poland > Ukraine > Morocco > Czech Republic > Lithuania > Sweden > Norway > eSwatini > > A changeset discussion with him can be found at > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87236896 > > Best regards > > Michael > > > [1] This date is not fixed yet. > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
