Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John wrote: As best as we can tell the wiki only covers source=survey which is on the map features page so why does potlatch use source=GPS? We? Anyway, you all seem to have missed source=User Defined on map features and the whole of the Key:source page. While GPS isn't specifically mentioned anywhere that I can see, source=GPS is clearly a more detailed use than source=survey which could be or other physical survey (Map Features). I personally don't bother with source=GPS as I upload the tracks and make them public, so it is fairly obvious in JOSM what the source is (less so in Potlatch when only most recent traces show I believe, so not all tracks are always visible when you press g). As you all can see from Tagwatch there are many variations on a theme: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: We? The talk-au list Anyway, you all seem to have missed source=User Defined on map It also says on the map features page: You can use any tags you like as long as the values are verifiable. However, there is a benefit in agreeing to a recommended set of features and corresponding tags in order to create, interpret and display a common basemap. source=survey is one such tag in the recommended set of features, source=GPS isn't documented on the map features page nor on the Key:source page. features and the whole of the Key:source page. While GPS isn't specifically mentioned anywhere that I can see, source=GPS is clearly a more detailed use than source=survey which could be or other physical survey (Map Features). I personally don't bother Then use: source=survey survey=gps gps=model/device. Simply stating GPS is no better than stating survey because you don't know what type of GPS was used. As you all can see from Tagwatch there are many variations on a theme: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html Doesn't mean things shouldn't be made consistent where possible. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On 24 Sep 2009, at 09:04, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: We? The talk-au list Anyway, you all seem to have missed source=User Defined on map It also says on the map features page: You can use any tags you like as long as the values are verifiable. However, there is a benefit in agreeing to a recommended set of features and corresponding tags in order to create, interpret and display a common basemap. source=survey is one such tag in the recommended set of features, source=GPS isn't documented on the map features page nor on the Key:source page. It does not matter if it is documented. When you read source=GPS you can be pretty sure that you understand what it means. features and the whole of the Key:source page. While GPS isn't specifically mentioned anywhere that I can see, source=GPS is clearly a more detailed use than source=survey which could be or other physical survey (Map Features). I personally don't bother Then use: source=survey survey=gps gps=model/device. Simply stating GPS is no better than stating survey because you don't know what type of GPS was used. It doesn't tell you about anything that would affect the GPS signal on that particular day, thus is a waste of time. Also the source tag is a bit useless once several people have been along a street and verified it, which is why I think that it should be put on to the changeset instead. As you all can see from Tagwatch there are many variations on a theme: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html Doesn't mean things shouldn't be made consistent where possible. Things that are important will become consistent through usage. The source tag is not an important tag, it is a freeform tag. The items on the map features page just give some ideas of the values that you can use. Shaun P.S. I'm a bit of a perfectionist, however there aren't enough hours in the day to be able to make tags that are absolutely perfect and get everyone using them all consistently. You just need people to start using them. Then when things break you can fix the tagging of the individual items. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk: It does not matter if it is documented. When you read source=GPS you can be pretty sure that you understand what it means. In this case survey and gps are synomonous, also I can't verify a GPS was in fact used if people move the way due to aerial imagery etc so it may not be a verifiable tag. Also the source tag is a bit useless once several people have been along a street and verified it, which is why I think that it should be put on to the changeset instead. So why not use survey, since that would most likely be the most accurate. Things that are important will become consistent through usage. The source tag is not an important tag, it is a freeform tag. The items on the map features page just give some ideas of the values that you can use. If consistency is let lapse in one area it will go into other areas, I could use the same logic for slightly more important tags and state it's a free form tag and so on up the chain till I start doing my own custom set of highway tags. P.S. I'm a bit of a perfectionist, however there aren't enough hours in the day to be able to make tags that are absolutely perfect and get everyone using them all consistently. You just need people to start using them. Then when things break you can fix the tagging of the individual items. Unless you want to go to significant effort thaere is no point stating gps over survey. In fact stating GPS could be slightly misleading, you have no idea what type of gps was used, any additional techniques to improve from the talk-au list: gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/ gps_model= hdop= pdop= (precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see them on each single node) Unless all the above is present you don't have precision, or going a step further without surveyor type equipment you aren't going to get accuracy anyway. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John Smith wrote: Unless you want to go to significant effort thaere is no point stating gps over survey. In fact stating GPS could be slightly misleading, you have no idea what type of gps was used, any additional techniques to improve from the talk-au list: gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/ gps_model= hdop= pdop= (precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see them on each single node) Unless all the above is present you don't have precision, or going a step further without surveyor type equipment you aren't going to get accuracy anyway. I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk: The source tag has been in use for the past 3+ years and no one has made such a fuss over it as you. You missed all the fun and excitment on the talk-au list today. The hdop and pdop will vary widely across the track, thus it would be useless adding it. Also what happens when you have many different traces. I for example have a few hundred traces from some of the streets that I commute to work on. What happens if I load a large portion of them for averaging a trace? Exactly my point, you stated you wanted precision and yet you can't define how to achieve it in real terms rather than saying gps is better than survey. You are trying to to store more information than is useful, thus wasting space and processing time for people using the data. No I'm trying to point out the futility of stating GPS is more accuracte than survey, since most survey's are done with gps this is a moot point. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. source=GPS is a more precise description of the source than source=survey. What you chose to do with that information is up to you, but I don't see why making the distinction is harmful? -- Jonas Häggqvist rasher(at)rasher(dot)dk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On 24 Sep 2009, at 12:54, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. A survey could mean a walking papers style survey without a gps. Shaun smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk: A survey could mean a walking papers style survey without a gps. Wouldn't that be an observation, a survey is physically surveying something... ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Jonas Häggqvist ras...@rasher.dk: John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. source=GPS is a more precise description of the source than source=survey. What you chose to do with that information is up to you, but I don't see why making the distinction is harmful? Because of consistency, if things this simple can't be consistent then more complex things will diverge. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John Smith wrote: Wouldn't that be an observation, a survey is physically surveying something... ? What is a survey but observing your surroundings? (And recording them, which is what a walking paper entails). Even with high-tec recoding equipment, most surveyors (in UK) still have those orange booklets to record levels, directions sketches. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Jonas Häggqvist wrote: source=GPS is a more precise description of the source than source=survey. it isn't precise at all gps is a subset of survey but it leaves a lot to be desired in terms of precision if you think that precision will help you will need far more information about the gps, the arrangement of the satellites that time/ day how much multipath the gps chipset the algorithms used which set of satellites (in the future) and the estimates of pdop will help the most usual method of survey on OSM is handheld GPS and it is accepted that survey with no further notes is survey done by handheld gps. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: What is a survey but observing your surroundings? (And recording them, which is what a walking paper entails). Lets face it, most surveyed paths are made by consumer grade GPS receivers, and street names surveyed are by observation, so source=survey covers the majority of situations without needing multiple sets of tags do we really want to do this: source=gps source:name=observation whereas source=survey surfices just fine... ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
you might be shocked. I rarely add this info. many edits are a mix of gps, yahoo tracing, best guess, averaging and interpolation with other existing data, topo maps if free version available, free shape files. why would I add all this info? just a lot of work with no benefit. we are not in a constant lawsuit where we have to document each single node. let's spend more time on the map instead of defining the rules if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open On 24 Sep 2009, at 5:37 , John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: What is a survey but observing your surroundings? (And recording them, which is what a walking paper entails). Lets face it, most surveyed paths are made by consumer grade GPS receivers, and street names surveyed are by observation, so source=survey covers the majority of situations without needing multiple sets of tags do we really want to do this: source=gps source:name=observation whereas source=survey surfices just fine... ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/25 Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com: you might be shocked. I rarely add this info. many edits are a mix of gps, yahoo tracing, best guess, averaging and interpolation with other existing data, topo maps if free version available, free shape files. why would I add all this info? just a lot of work with no benefit. we are There is a lot of benefit in knowing the source beyond the reason of lawsuits, firstly if you use a lower grade set of data to map from and I have a higher quality I would know that mine is more likely to be accurate without guessing. not in a constant lawsuit where we have to document each single node. let's spend more time on the map instead of defining the rules Without such rules people would tag everything anyway they saw fit and it would be completely useless. if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? I don't think that sticking to the name will get us anywhere. OSM has reached a stage where we are not just mapping streets any more. I mean we have administrative boundaries, zoos, golf courses, etc... Everyone is finding what they want in Open Street Maps. It is in the nature of the project to evolve that way. Also, there is something else to keep in mind. There are a number of us that believe that while we need some basic rules to keep things consistent, everything should be free to evolve on their own. There are a few proeminent contributors with the anarchy tag on their wiki pages. Trying to enforce rules will get you nowhere especially considering how Open Street Maps has evolved over time. While we strive to achieve a very high accuracy, we cannot guarantee that everything will be perfect. When you look at some other map makers, they all make that kind of statements too. OSM works partly because rules are not that strongly binding in the end. Would I want to work on a project where everything is defined in advance, and where I get stuck in bureaucracy because I need to follow some very strict rules? No, absolutely not. I can understand the mindset for needing rules, but as far as I am concerned, rules are made to be bended. Emilie Laffray ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
Emilie Laffray wrote: 2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? I don't think that sticking to the name will get us anywhere. OSM has reached a stage where we are not just mapping streets any more. I mean we have administrative boundaries, zoos, golf courses, etc... Everyone is finding what they want in Open Street Maps. It is in the nature of the project to evolve that way. Also, there is something else to keep in mind. There are a number of us that believe that while we need some basic rules to keep things consistent, everything should be free to evolve on their own. There are a few proeminent contributors with the anarchy tag on their wiki pages. ...And yet cry like girls when their internet connection goes down :-) I believe that the rules are a bit too lax needs tightening up. If you look at the Tagwatch-Source link from earlier: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html How many of those have just one Count against them? I mean GPS (drove down there by mistake) http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/osmxapi/*%5Bsource=GPS%20%28drove%20down%20there%20by%20mistake%29%5D. Oh for crying out loud!! The problem with this is for the renderers. OK I know what your going to say, DMFTR, but I think that's wrong. (I've even been told the data is the only important thing in OSM!) Say somebody is out for a country walk, or wants to know the quickest way to get out of Vegas they're never going to say 'Ooh what nice XML file you've got there, so well formatted'. They want to see a clear, accurate map or an accurate route list of every turning to take. See it from the renderers/routers point of view. Their product is going to be judged on quality of the output. They're not going to spend their time getting their map to render properly /all /the tags with just one count. This will leave gaps in the map. As they have no control over the data I think most renderers will either give up or not even bother to start with. To help with the problem the editors need to have a more complete predefined options list to steer people in the right direction cut down on spelling mistakes I realise Source tag is not relevant to mapping but you know get the point. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
Dave F. wrote: Emilie Laffray wrote: 2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? I don't think that sticking to the name will get us anywhere. OSM has reached a stage where we are not just mapping streets any more. I mean we have administrative boundaries, zoos, golf courses, etc... Everyone is finding what they want in Open Street Maps. It is in the nature of the project to evolve that way. Also, there is something else to keep in mind. There are a number of us that believe that while we need some basic rules to keep things consistent, everything should be free to evolve on their own. There are a few proeminent contributors with the anarchy tag on their wiki pages. ...And yet cry like girls when their internet connection goes down :-) I believe that the rules are a bit too lax needs tightening up. If you look at the Tagwatch-Source link from earlier: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html How many of those have just one Count against them? I mean GPS (drove down there by mistake) http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/osmxapi/*%5Bsource=GPS%20%28drove%20down%20there%20by%20mistake%29%5D. Oh for crying out loud!! The problem with this is for the renderers. OK I know what your going to say, DMFTR, but I think that's wrong. (I've even been told the data is the only important thing in OSM!) Say somebody is out for a country walk, or wants to know the quickest way to get out of Vegas they're never going to say 'Ooh what nice XML file you've got there, so well formatted'. They want to see a clear, accurate map or an accurate route list of every turning to take. See it from the renderers/routers point of view. Their product is going to be judged on quality of the output. They're not going to spend their time getting their map to render properly /all /the tags with just one count. This will leave gaps in the map. As they have no control over the data I think most renderers will either give up or not even bother to start with. To help with the problem the editors need to have a more complete predefined options list to steer people in the right direction cut down on spelling mistakes I realise Source tag is not relevant to mapping but you know get the point. Without completely replying to your argument, I can definitely see it from the point of view of renderers/routers/other things, since I am paid by my company to deliver a product out of OpenStreetMap. Yes, it would be nice to have everything well defined without boundaries, and that would leave out the most creative things out of OSM. The example you are giving is in my view wrong. I don't think anyway will actually argue with you on this one. You are talking about oners that nobody cares about. I don't think you will get much blank out of those tags. You could choose many other tags it would boil down to the same: you start caring about tags that are starting to get used. It is a bit like the Evolution: survival of the fittest. In the product, I am working on I don't care about one tag, I care about some specific tags, and I do use tag watch to pick up some tags that are starting to get used. And no I am not doing yet another renderer or router. I care more about OSM as a database (which it is in my view) because it enables way more things than just being a map (look at the monopoly application). I am sorry but people will make spelling mistakes all the time. The only way I can see them disappear is to use editors that won't allow user input and I don't see that happening any time soon. If your argument was true, you would have no one making new renderers or routers. I keep seeing new projects so clearly those people must find the data reliable enough to produce maps. As far as I am concerned, not every tags are even rendered in current renderers, because they don't necessarily have a particular focus. If you want a touristic map renderer, then you will start using some specific tags and you will start looking at things coming from tagwatch to see how you can improve your maps according to your needs. Emilie Laffray signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: you might be shocked. I rarely add this info. many edits are a mix of gps, yahoo tracing, best guess, averaging and interpolation with other existing data, topo maps if free version available, free shape files. why would I add all this info? It is really important for us aussie mappers to know whether a road has been genuiinely surveyed - that is someone went there as opposed to traced from Landsat images. Because we plan routes depending on what hasn't been mapped, or what needs checking for accuracy. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: It is really important for us aussie mappers to know whether a road has been genuiinely surveyed - that is someone went there as opposed to traced from Landsat images. Then ask people to use highway=road if they don't survey from the ground. Tag source is not important, comments in changeset are not important, complex tagging schema or requests to measure road width every ten meters are not important. Important is the fun to map. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/25 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: It is really important for us aussie mappers to know whether a road has been genuiinely surveyed - that is someone went there as opposed to traced from Landsat images. Then ask people to use highway=road if they don't survey from the ground. How would that help? If the road exists and we know what it is it should appear on OSM as such, that doesn't tell us the quality of the data. Tag source is not important I think that's how we got to this point in the first place, some people do place considerable weight on information stored in source tags. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
