Re: [Talk-GB] Routing and other problems west of Uttoxeter
Hi guys On 11/08/11 11:56, Paul Williams wrote: This morning, darren39 has fixed the unconnected way (125500644) Andy mentioned (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8983662). A section of the A522 was also deleted in darren39's first changeset after the block (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/62360148/history) and replaced by a new way (version 1 of http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/125500635/history). This new way also wasn't connected to various other roads including the next section northbound of the A522, but I reconnected it. I think it would be much better if he didn't keep deleting ways when he wants to alter them and instead altered the existing way, to avoid creating all these unconnected roads (and also make it easier to see the history of the way). Even though I'm a relative newbie to OSM ( and very much to this list) I think that this kind of activity needs to be discouraged. I got an Garmin Edge 705 just over a year ago and joined OSM to get a free map for it. OSM already had a good enough map for my area. Eastbourne. For my needs anyway - to track my cycling. I had read that support for routing on Garmin wasn't fully debugged yet and so it appeared to me. Recently I had course to use the 705 when I went to Eagle Heights [1] with a friend who don't have sat-nav in his car. My 705 plotted the same path Google Maps did, so I took it with me that day and it got us there and back perfectly. As a result I have been revisiting my previous assumption that it was the bugging routing support that was the problem with my 705 routing around Eastbourne. What I discovered was that there are (were?) unconnected cycle routes in the Eastbourne area and this was largely to blame for the poor routing I was getting. Yesterday I applied a patch [2] to the map to connect one of the major cycle routes need me to the road it parallels. This has made a vast improvement to the routing. Where before it took me down to the coast road (the cycle path was only connected to the road network at its end points) now it routes me almost perfectly. I still see a quirk [3], which I am unable to explain or fix. My best guess is that it is picking the service road (Fort Lane [4]) over the main road as better for cyclists. But if any knowledgeable person can enlighten me about what is really happening, thanks (and teach me what to look for and how to fix it for the future). Anyway the point, to the long rambling story, is to back up my first statement that darren39 editing methods should be discouraged. When I fist joined the Eastbourne maps looked good enough, so I didn't think I had to do much. Now I think that the routing quirks I was (and still am) getting are largely down to bad data in the database. I hope to be a little more proactive in fixing Eastbourne now. It may look pretty - but it isn't there functionally yet. It sounds to me that darren39's is reducing the functionality of the database. Steve [1] I personally recommend Eagle Heights to anyone interested in wild life, particularly birds of prey. http://www.eagleheights.co.uk/ [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8988011 [3] Screen shot of the Garmin Edge 705 http://twitpic.com/64qusi [4] Same area as [3] on OSM http://osm.org/go/0EAPbpiOo- -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Routing and other problems west of Uttoxeter
Steve Dobson wrote: I think it would be much better if he didn't keep deleting ways when he wants to alter them and instead altered the existing way, to avoid creating all these unconnected roads (and also make it easier to see the history of the way). Even though I'm a relative newbie to OSM ( and very much to this list) I think that this kind of activity needs to be discouraged. I think this is highlighting the need for an improvement being discussed on the main talk list ... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/new_id] It is interesting looking at the history for some changes and seeing what 'collateral damage' is being done to additional information by people who have yet to fully get up to speed with all the finer points of editing. At least the addition of a tag which links the deleted or earlier related material would allow others to backtrack and 'repair the damage', perhaps we need a merge tool so that tags from the older id's can be restored to the new one? Whilst scanning history I've noticed many places where items HAVE been deleted and replaced with in essence the same item, but with things like disability access lost. Personally I would prefer to see 'delete' removed altogether, and replaced with 'end_date', since in many cases the historic information IS as important as the current view. Current map rendering simply ignores anything with an end_date older than today, but we can still render maps for previous time frames :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways
Hi All Does anyone know of a way to look for highway segments that cross each other? It would also be useful if one could filter out certain types of highways, bridges for example. The problem is that I have found around Eastbourne that the cycle way close to my house was only connected to the road network at either end, although it crossed the roads several times. This caused the routing software in my Garmin Edge 705 (sat-nav) to route badly. I would there for like to fix all cycleways around Eastbourne that cross roads but do not share a common node at their point of intersection. The above search would be very helpful in this effort. Thanks for your suggestions. -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways
If you haven't been told privately already: http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php?zoom=7lat=53.03726lon=-3.41417layers=B00Tch=0%2C30%2C40%2C50%2C60%2C70%2C90%2C100%2C110%2C120%2C130%2C150%2C160%2C170%2C180%2C191%2C192%2C193%2C194%2C195%2C196%2C197%2C198%2C201%2C202%2C203%2C204%2C205%2C206%2C207%2C208%2C210%2C220%2C231%2C232%2C270%2C281%2C282%2C283%2C284%2C291%2C292%2C293%2C311%2C312%2C313%2C350%2C380show_ign=1show_tmpign=1 Check out the list of 'errors' it displays on the left hand side... Hope it's helpful, Tim --- On Fri, 12/8/11, Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org wrote: From: Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Friday, 12 August, 2011, 10:00 Hi All Does anyone know of a way to look for highway segments that cross each other? It would also be useful if one could filter out certain types of highways, bridges for example. The problem is that I have found around Eastbourne that the cycle way close to my house was only connected to the road network at either end, although it crossed the roads several times. This caused the routing software in my Garmin Edge 705 (sat-nav) to route badly. I would there for like to fix all cycleways around Eastbourne that cross roads but do not share a common node at their point of intersection. The above search would be very helpful in this effort. Thanks for your suggestions. -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways
Hmm, actually, may not be what you're looking for afterall - perhaps the in-built error checking features of JOSM may be better: if I remember correctly, trying to upload a changeset with ways crossing but not connected flags up a warning... Tim --- On Fri, 12/8/11, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: From: Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org, Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org Date: Friday, 12 August, 2011, 10:06 If you haven't been told privately already: http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php?zoom=7lat=53.03726lon=-3.41417layers=B00Tch=0%2C30%2C40%2C50%2C60%2C70%2C90%2C100%2C110%2C120%2C130%2C150%2C160%2C170%2C180%2C191%2C192%2C193%2C194%2C195%2C196%2C197%2C198%2C201%2C202%2C203%2C204%2C205%2C206%2C207%2C208%2C210%2C220%2C231%2C232%2C270%2C281%2C282%2C283%2C284%2C291%2C292%2C293%2C311%2C312%2C313%2C350%2C380show_ign=1show_tmpign=1 Check out the list of 'errors' it displays on the left hand side... Hope it's helpful, Tim --- On Fri, 12/8/11, Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org wrote: From: Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Friday, 12 August, 2011, 10:00 Hi All Does anyone know of a way to look for highway segments that cross each other? It would also be useful if one could filter out certain types of highways, bridges for example. The problem is that I have found around Eastbourne that the cycle way close to my house was only connected to the road network at either end, although it crossed the roads several times. This caused the routing software in my Garmin Edge 705 (sat-nav) to route badly. I would there for like to fix all cycleways around Eastbourne that cross roads but do not share a common node at their point of intersection. The above search would be very helpful in this effort. Thanks for your suggestions. -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Routing and other problems west of Uttoxeter
Steve Dobson wrote: It is interesting looking at the history for some changes and seeing what 'collateral damage' is being done to additional information by people who have yet to fully get up to speed with all the finer points of editing. Playing devils advocate here - one man's 'collateral damage' is another man's improvements. As a newbie how do I know that my edits are `good'? One joins OSM and gets full edit rights to the database. I didn't have to pass any tests to show that I know what I'm doing. I've just looked at what has been none in other areas of the map and aped it. In reality these 'improvements' ARE at the expense of more important information as has been shown here :( In order to retain the 'open access' policy we DO need a little more security such as the ability to selectively roll back changes or merge back in the background material. Some people have put a lot of effort into the finer details, so 'delete' SHOULD be a little more difficult to action, and perhaps REQUIRE an added comment as to why something was deleted? The new_id tag would need to be integrated into an API process related to delete and other actions that can result in missing information. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Routing and other problems west of Uttoxeter
Hi Lester On 12/08/11 10:09, Lester Caine wrote: Steve Dobson wrote: It is interesting looking at the history for some changes and seeing what 'collateral damage' is being done to additional information by people who have yet to fully get up to speed with all the finer points of editing. Playing devils advocate here - one man's 'collateral damage' is another man's improvements. As a newbie how do I know that my edits are `good'? One joins OSM and gets full edit rights to the database. I didn't have to pass any tests to show that I know what I'm doing. I've just looked at what has been none in other areas of the map and aped it. In reality these 'improvements' ARE at the expense of more important information as has been shown here :( In this one case I don't disagree. But I was thinking more about the general newbie problem: How do I know that my edits are improving things and not harming them? In order to retain the 'open access' policy we DO need a little more security such as the ability to selectively roll back changes or merge back in the background material. Some people have put a lot of effort into the finer details, so 'delete' SHOULD be a little more difficult to action, and perhaps REQUIRE an added comment as to why something was deleted? The new_id tag would need to be integrated into an API process related to delete and other actions that can result in missing information. The OSM database does not enforce any method of editing and thus all methods are equally acceptable - at least to the code. This was probably a good thing at the start of the project. There were few contributors, and much work to do. But that is not the case now. As far as I can see much of the western world has got a basic map already there. I'm not saying that what is there is perfect. The effort needed is to improve things, but to improve things in the correct way. The `open access' policy of the code is not supporting that activity. I'm thinking here in terms of zones of commit access. The edits of a newbie, such as myself, to Eastbourne don't get committed to the database fully until they get approved by a East Sussex zone authority. Once the newbie as demonstrated that they can do things right then they can be promoted to a zone authority. Steve -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways
Hi Tim, Craig Many thanks, KeepRight does appear to fit the bill, it also seams to spot other things around Eastbourne and I will start work trying to clear them. However, it has shown up that the edit I made yesterday isn't perfect as I didn't create junction nodes. I can't see what's different about the nodes I created and the end points so I have no idea what I didn't do that I should have. Could you be kind enough to point me at the documentation for junction nodes so I can create them correctly. Ta Steve On 12/08/11 11:19, Craig Loftus wrote: I think Keep right is what he is looking for, the intersections without junctions error seems to fit the bill. Just untick the errors you're not interested in. JOSM's validator is an option as well, but you obviously have to download all the data for an area you want to check. Craig On 12 August 2011 10:09, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hmm, actually, may not be what you're looking for afterall - perhaps the in-built error checking features of JOSM may be better: if I remember correctly, trying to upload a changeset with ways crossing but not connected flags up a warning... Tim --- On *Fri, 12/8/11, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk* wrote: From: Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org, Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org Date: Friday, 12 August, 2011, 10:06 If you haven't been told privately already: http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php?zoom=7lat=53.03726lon=-3.41417layers=B00Tch=0%2C30%2C40%2C50%2C60%2C70%2C90%2C100%2C110%2C120%2C130%2C150%2C160%2C170%2C180%2C191%2C192%2C193%2C194%2C195%2C196%2C197%2C198%2C201%2C202%2C203%2C204%2C205%2C206%2C207%2C208%2C210%2C220%2C231%2C232%2C270%2C281%2C282%2C283%2C284%2C291%2C292%2C293%2C311%2C312%2C313%2C350%2C380show_ign=1show_tmpign=1 Check out the list of 'errors' it displays on the left hand side... Hope it's helpful, Tim --- On *Fri, 12/8/11, Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org* wrote: From: Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Friday, 12 August, 2011, 10:00 Hi All Does anyone know of a way to look for highway segments that cross each other? It would also be useful if one could filter out certain types of highways, bridges for example. The problem is that I have found around Eastbourne that the cycle way close to my house was only connected to the road network at either end, although it crossed the roads several times. This caused the routing software in my Garmin Edge 705 (sat-nav) to route badly. I would there for like to fix all cycleways around Eastbourne that cross roads but do not share a common node at their point of intersection. The above search would be very helpful in this effort. Thanks for your suggestions. -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Steve Dobson ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways
Steve Dobson wrote: Many thanks, KeepRight does appear to fit the bill, it also seams to spot other things around Eastbourne and I will start work trying to clear them. However, it has shown up that the edit I made yesterday isn't perfect as I didn't create junction nodes. I can't see what's different about the nodes I created and the end points so I have no idea what I didn't do that I should have. Could you be kind enough to point me at the documentation for junction nodes so I can create them correctly. I was just thinking the same thing ... My own area was fairly clean except for a number of those :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways
- Original Message - From: Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu To: Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 11:37 AM Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways Keep right seams to lag a bit behind the current state, just click the ignore for now option. Does anyone know how/ when it updates? Text at the very extreme bottom left indicated last update was 3 August 2011 David On 12 Aug 2011 11:25, Steve Dobson st...@dobbo.org wrote: Hi Tim, Craig Many thanks, KeepRight does appear to fit the bill, it also seams to spot other things around Eastbourne and I will start work trying to clear them. However, it has shown up that the edit I made yesterday isn't perfect as I didn't create junction nodes. I can't see what's different about the nodes I created and the end points so I have no idea what I didn't do that I should have. Could you be kind enough to point me at the documentation for junction nodes so I can create them correctly. Ta Steve On 12/08/11 11:19, Craig Loftus wrote: I think Keep right is what he is looking for, the inter... On 12 August 2011 10:09, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hmm, actually, may not ... --- On *Fri, 12/8/11, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk* wrote: From: Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Looking For Unconnected Cycleways To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org, Steve... ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
