Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Just to clarify, I'm not proposing a mechanical edit. I don't think it's appropriate. >From reading the responses, most people would prefer to keep the tag tiger:reviewed. I respect it and will not ask for a change in JOSM. Clifford On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Wolfgang Zenker

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

* Richard Welty [180511 20:16]: > On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote: >> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them >> all, everywhere. > i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer > that they > stick around. i

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

The legacy of TIGER-tagging will persist in OSM for a long, long time. That is the reality of the import we did, rough/sloppy data and all. This legacy serves as many lessons to be learned regarding the practice(s) of wide-scale imports. If it sounds like I'm saying "we made this bed, so now

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

> I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed > it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up. I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object, I delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote: > So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them > all, everywhere. i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer that they stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name, connectivity,

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

One contrary view: I regret to say that there are still quite a few "tiger:reviewed=no" roads in my neck of the woods - the south San Francisco Bay area. I select the setting to highlight them in JOSM, and use it to remind myself to try to survey and fully tag them. Where possible I prefer to

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Very true Mike. There is still some value in detecting TIGER roads that are in 'original' state. For example, if you can detect a cluster of 'unmodified' TIGER roads, that would point to an area entirely untouched by human editors. I write 'original' and 'unmodified' in quotes, because a number of

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER as > the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads. > - > Just because a TIGER road has been modified doesn't mean it has

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Bryan, There are members of the US community that object to using proprietary apps such as Slack. I respect their opinion that I used the mailing list to get a consensus. I do enjoy Slack, but like forums, thread can be missed, especially as we build the community on slack with more and more

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

I kinda object to any type of mechanical removal of this tag, mainly because I do still use it. I've modified JOSM's settings to show the yellow highlight, and I periodically go on a TIGER editing spree, especially in the county I live in. It has been very valuable in finding and fixing misnamed

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up. I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag left

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

On 5/11/2018 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a good idea. I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to the list of

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

I agree it would be great to get rid of `tiger:reviewed`. I proposed this for iD 3 years ago but received some pushback: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2697 I would be ok if it were removed via a mechanical edit. As an aside, I

[Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this