Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception
On Sun, Aug 06, 2023 at 07:18:29PM +, NickKatchur via Tagging wrote: > Hello, > > I have developed a proposal to indicate the availability of cell phone > service at nodes and areas, > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Cell_reception. I would consider this data much to volatile to make sense in OSM. Cellphone Networks are constantly changing, frequencies, modulation, coverage, sector antennas are replaced constantly. So GSM may fade out, LTE comes in. Different frequency, different coverage. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception
No, this does not fix it. The fundamental thing that you're trying to map here simply doesn't belong in OSM, the proposal will not pass, and I would advise you to stop wasting your time and everyone else's on it. OpenStreetMap is a database of verifiable facts, not scientific measurements, and that's an important distinction. So while we might map the elevation of a mountain, the height of a building, or the width of a road, those are values that are fixed and perfectly verifiable by subsequent mappers. Mapping cell phone service is subject to the whims of the individual mapper's equipment, the environment, and a whole host of other factors discussed in this thread. We also don't map rasterized area measurements, things like elevation or bathymetric contours, or mean surface temperature or cloud cover. The database and its data model simply isn't set up for wide-area measurement data; there are other data sets that do these things. If tagging were established for such a thing as cell reception, we might imagine that the next thing that happens is someone releases a smartphone app that automatically uploads nodes with cell reception data into OSM, and very quickly the map would become uneditable due to a proliferation of computer-generated nodes. On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 8:17 PM NickKatchur via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > OP here. While there has been an overwhelming amount of feedback (or > criticism) for the proposal. I'd like to discuss thoughts and changes to > the proposal based on this discussion and that on the community forum ( > https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-feature-proposal-cell-phone-reception/102131 > ). > > There seems to be a separation between those who largely disagree with any > mapping of such features within the OSM community and those that find value > and the possibility of inclusion. The following key highlights of the > revised proposal hopes to find a middle ground in the realm of realistic to > map while also providing user benefit. > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception
Le 08.08.23 à 02:13, NickKatchur via Tagging a écrit : # The reduction of additional tagging models to only strength with excellent/good/low/issues/none options. imho it's already include in =no =limited =yes ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception
On 8/8/23 04:32, Marc_marc wrote: Hello, Le 06.08.23 à 21:18, NickKatchur via Tagging a écrit : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Cell_reception I'm a bit amused, or rather disappointed, to read comments like "it's complicated to estimate the number of reception bars because it depends on the phone". Were these kinds of comments made after reading the proposal or simply in reaction to the headline? the proposal isn't about encoding the number of reception bars. I don't see what problem there would be in me entering that my dentist's surgery has no GSM reception, nothing ever, I don't see what lack of objectivity there would be in encoding this in osm. I don't see what problem there would be in saying that another POI has major reception problems but that it still works, it doesn't matter if you have 2 bars and I have 3, it doesn't change the fact that it's much less than the average you'd expect in this kind of place. and so the =no and =limited values seem to me to be much more objective than some route classifications Not all phones are created equal. An Australian cell service provider rates some phones as better for country and regional area reception. If you have one of these you are more likely to rate a connection 'good' instead of 'limited' and 'limited' instead of 'no'. https://www.telstra.com.au/mobile-phones/blue-tick Of course my phone is 'blue ticked'. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception
On 7/8/23 07:20, Timothy Noname wrote: I thinks it's definitely valuable to map areas where there is no coverage at all as it's a safety issue For safety sake it is best to assume there will be no cell phone coverage. The battery could go flat, the phone could be lost, drowned or damaged. If you need a way of making an emergency signal then EPIRB/PRB is the way to go. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
