Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Thank you, Warin, thank you Mike, thank you Zeke: With Warin's "clarifications," I think we move closer to something approaching a reasonable way to say this. I would correct "renders" to "renderers," and perhaps change it to "OSM's database and renderers...", but aside from that, +1. > On

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On 6/12/22 06:39, Mike Thompson wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:22 AM Minh Nguyen via talk wrote: Vào lúc 09:55 2022-12-05, Zeke Farwell đã viết: > That is a good summary, though "Once the OSM available satellite imagery > does not show the feature" 1) There are other

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:22 AM Minh Nguyen via talk wrote: > Vào lúc 09:55 2022-12-05, Zeke Farwell đã viết: > > That is a good summary, though "Once the OSM available satellite imagery > > does not show the feature" 1) There are other sources that an armchair mapper can use other than

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Vào lúc 09:55 2022-12-05, Zeke Farwell đã viết: That is a good summary, though "Once the OSM available satellite imagery does not show the feature" is perhaps a bit too strict.  Some things aren't always visible or clear from aerial imagery and need to be surveyed in person.  I'm sure the

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

That is a good summary, though "Once the OSM available satellite imagery does not show the feature" is perhaps a bit too strict. Some things aren't always visible or clear from aerial imagery and need to be surveyed in person. I'm sure the intent of this phrase is not to encourage people to

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

I would mention - it is OK to temporarily map ones not visible on aerial images but likely to be mistakenly remapped - "can safely be removed" - would change that it not only can be removed, but also should be removed 5 gru 2022, 11:26 od 61sundow...@gmail.com: > I have placed what I believe

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

I have placed what I believe is a summary of this discussion on the OSM wiki for lifecycle It reads "The following tags function is to reduce the possibility of a mapper remapping the feature from existing satellite imagery that shows the old state of the feature. Once the OSM available

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Oct 26, 2022, 12:05 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 26 Oct 2022, at 11:45, Mateusz Konieczny via talk >> wrote: >> >> Note that when you found some gone railway >> mapped in OSM then it is useful >> >> - edit OSM object to note which traces are left if any >>

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Vào lúc 16:41 2022-10-26, Zeke Farwell đã viết: On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:11 PM Greg Troxel > wrote: I think people should keep in mind that a culture of deltionism is demoralizing to contributors and harms OSM more than a few  marginal items in the

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

sent from a phone > On 27 Oct 2022, at 01:44, Zeke Farwell wrote: > > I support mapping old rail beds as railway=razed where they are visible in > forests, fields, and other open land. These traces are often not visible to > those with an untrained eye and that's certainly an issue.

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:11 PM Greg Troxel wrote: > > I think people should keep in mind that a culture of deltionism is > demoralizing to contributors and harms OSM more than a few marginal > items in the database. > This is a fair point, but given how often this comes up, it doesn't seem

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Frederik Ramm writes: > you are correct in all aspects, however in the spirit of friendly > collaboration I would say that a limited amount of > stuff-that-should-not-be-in-OSM can be *tolerated*. If someone does a > lot of good work for OSM otherwise and would really like to record an >

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Some historical perspective on a project like OSM, its growth, the social aspects of "what that means and does to tagging" over time might be helpful. The dates and numbers I'm about to offer as examples are wholly illustrative (and indicate not arithmetic, but geometric growth, a very

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

sent from a phone > On 26 Oct 2022, at 11:45, Mateusz Konieczny via talk > wrote: > > Note that when you found some gone railway > mapped in OSM then it is useful > > - edit OSM object to note which traces are left if any > (ideally, it would be done by original mapper) > > - or delete

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Which OSM Wiki pages you checked to find out reason for existence of things like demolished:building=yes? Recently demolished building may be visible on aerial images Using lifecycle prefixes it is possible to clearly mark that specific object must not be remapped without proper verification.

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Le 25.10.22 à 19:45, Colin Smale a écrit : Are underground pipelines and electricity transmission cables just as controversial? They are covered over, built on, and completely unobservable from the surface in several European countries, the markers are visible from satellite imagery and by

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Le 25.10.22 à 20:26, Minh Nguyen a écrit : If you have time to write up your experiences in OHM's central issue tracker [1], it could have a concrete impact on the project. https://github.com/OpenHistoricalMap/issues/issues/478 ___ talk mailing

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Hi, On 10/25/22 19:18, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: In my experience, it is more often the opposite situation that happens. A mapper, unaware of the lengthy debates on the topic of former railroads, is mapping her house and removes the bit of abandoned rail currently on the map in that spot,

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Vào lúc 06:40 2022-10-25, Marc_marc đã viết: when to migrate the data to ohm, I am convinced. however, having tested it this month, it's horribly non-ergonomic and I don't believe for a moment that it's within the reach of an iD contributor nor of an average contributor with josm, unless a

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 1:45 PM Colin Smale wrote: > Are underground pipelines and electricity transmission cables just as > controversial? They are covered over, built on, and completely unobservable > from the surface. They may also have been taken out of service many decades > ago. > In the

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

> On 25/10/2022 19:18 CEST Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 4:37 AM Frederik Ramm mailto:frede...@remote.org> wrote: > > > in the spirit of friendly collaboration I would say that a limited amount of > > stuff-that-should-not-be-in-OSM can be *tolerated*. If

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:46 AM Marc_marc wrote: > Hello, > > Le 25.10.22 à 09:42, Warin a écrit : > > why have the tags that mean there is nothing left of it? > > I'm using from time to time as a QA-tag to avoid that a mapper > add it back I do this as well. We have had some major wildfires

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 4:37 AM Frederik Ramm wrote: > in the spirit of friendly collaboration I would say that a limited amount > of > stuff-that-should-not-be-in-OSM can be *tolerated*. If someone does a > lot of good work for OSM otherwise and would really like to record an > ancient former

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 4:37 AM Frederik Ramm wrote: > If someone does a > lot of good work for OSM otherwise and would really like to record an > ancient former railroad that ran through where their house now sits - I > shrug and let them do it. Only if someone starts to make it their > mission

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On 25/10/2022 08:42, Warin wrote: If OSM is about mapping what exists today .. why have the tags that mean there is nothing left of it? The main OSM website/database shouldn't. it is for *current* data. "OpenStreetMap is a place for mapping things that are both /real and current/"

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Hello, Le 25.10.22 à 09:42, Warin a écrit : why have the tags that mean there is nothing left of it? I'm using from time to time as a QA-tag to avoid that a mapper add it back (and in fact, I don't care, for osm, if it's demolished, removed or destroyed, because if you weren't there the day

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

As usual (nearly all of the time!), I appreciate and agree with your well-stated clarifications, Frederik! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Hi, you are correct in all aspects, however in the spirit of friendly collaboration I would say that a limited amount of stuff-that-should-not-be-in-OSM can be *tolerated*. If someone does a lot of good work for OSM otherwise and would really like to record an ancient former railroad that

Re: [OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

On Oct 25, 2022, at 12:42 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: a > Question: about mapping of old railway infrastructure. Without "meaning to be mean," I say "oh, no, not again!" I say it like that because OSM has had this discussion many, many times. I'll be relatively brief here and have

[OSM-talk] razed railways and other things that don't exist today

Hi, Question: If OSM is about mapping what exists today .. why have the tags that mean there is nothing left of it? demolished:*=*     Not existing anymore because of active removal  removed:*=*     Not existing anymore because of active removal (possible duplicate of demolished:*=*)