I'm currently reviewing some Corine imported data in Brittany in an area I
visited in 2015 with a view to understanding more about how natural=heath
has been used.
Jerry
On 11 January 2017 at 19:27, ael wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:53:51AM +, SK53 wrote:
>
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:53:51AM +, SK53 wrote:
> Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of polygons
> tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months to OSM.
I have just found the message to the mapper who changed area on Bodmin
Moor to heath: that was
- Original Message --
From: "SK53" <sk53@gmail.com>
To: "Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>
Sent: 09/01/2017 11:53:51
Subject: [Talk-GB] natural=heath
Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of
polygons tagged natur
No-one has solved conflation in OSM, so there is no mechanism for
re-merging branches (I suspect that it's fundamentally very hard for geo
data).
If there were usable common conflation techniques there would be many fewer
problems with imports.
A more viable approach is a post-processed version
2017-01-09 12:40 GMT+00:00 Jez Nicholson :
> has there ever been discussion about code branching in OSM? In git terms, we
> are all making changes direct to master. I'm wondering whether small changes
> could be automatically approved and large changes would require peer
On 09/01/2017 12:40, Jez Nicholson wrote:
... so maybe a bot that auto-challenges large/sweeping changes?
I can just see it - "Clippy for OSM" - "It looks as if you are crayoning
in some landuse? May I suggest you leave your chair and map what is
outside your door?" :)
More seriously,
has there ever been discussion about code branching in OSM? In git terms,
we are all making changes direct to master. I'm wondering whether small
changes could be automatically approved and large changes would require
peer review first.
I know that this is a huge change to the base
On 09/01/2017 12:28, ael wrote:
When I contacted one of the main offenders; I didn't get a very
helpful response.
It's a shame that this happens, but please do keep trying to contact
other mappers where there's a problem like this. If for no other
reason, it exposes the problem on
On 09/01/2017 11:53, SK53 wrote:
Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of
polygons tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months
to OSM.
I think what's happening here is one mapper "colouring in" without any
particular knowledge of the area. Whilst
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:53:51AM +, SK53 wrote:
> Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of polygons
> tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months to OSM.
I too have encountered at least one armchair mapper who (in my view)
incorrectly tagged large
Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of polygons
tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months to OSM.
I only noticed these when looking at old traces on the new GPX trace
overlay. Specifically I noticed them on the Snowdon range extending beyond
Moel
11 matches
Mail list logo