Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[JB]

Oui. Ou non. C'est un lieu pour passer une nuit au milieu d'une 
randonnée de plusieurs jours. Pour moi, ce n'est pas forcément opposé à 
alpine_hut. J'aime bien regarder l'idée du tag plutôt que sa définition 
précise, qui ne couvre jamais tous les cas.

JB.

Le 09/12/2020 à 23:24, mides.map a écrit :
C'est un peu là le problème, on ne s'attend pas à trouver une 
structure classée "refuge d'altitude" dans ce type de zone géographique.


Le 09/12/2020 à 22:57, Eric SIBERT via Talk-fr a écrit :

Et que dire du refuge CAF de Bonneval-sur-Arc?

http://www.refuges.info/point/110/cabane-non-gardee/Mont-Cenis-Grand-Paradis/Chalet-de-Bonneval-sur-Arc/ 


https://chaletbonnevalsurarc.ffcam.fr/

En zone résidentielle et à 50 m de la mairie ;-)

Eric

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr





___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-at] PLZ und Ortsvorwahlen von Österreich

[Johann Haag]

Am Mi., 9. Dez. 2020 um 18:43 Uhr schrieb Philipp Kolmann via Talk-at <
talk-at@openstreetmap.org>:

> Liebe Leute,
>
> danke für die aufmunternden Worte. Hab erst mal die ersten Mails
> verdauen müssen.
>
Hallo Phillip, entschuldige wenn meine Wortmeldung vielleicht zu forsch
war. Ich finde Dein Projekt durchaus interessant, nur was hat dieses mit
OpenStreetMap gemein. Du könntest für Dein Projekt schließlich als
Kartenhintergrund genausogut Google oder auch die Basemap verwenden.
Wenn Du eine Bühne für Dein Github Projekt suchst, dann gibt es sicher
bessere Plattformen. talk-at definiert sich als Diskussionsraum für
OpenStreetMap Projekte, also Initiativen welche in irgend einer Weise mit
der OpenStreetMap Datenbank interagieren.
Du hast sicher bemerkt dass ich in Wien nun in OpenStreetMap, die
Telefonvorwahl eingetragen habe, auch Eine Region in Vorarlberg ist bereits
erfasst. Ich würde gerne wissen ob ich Deine Karte hierzu für OpenStreetMap
nutzen darf, bisher habe ich hierzu von Dir noch keine Antwort erhalten.

Grüße Johann


> Meine ursprüngliche Intention war einfach eine Eingrenzung der Vorwahlen
> auf Gebiete zu machen. Daher kommt auch die Ziffernweise Suche und dann
> der Zoom auf das Gebiet. Ich wollte einfach wissen, wie die Vorwahlen
> und dann die PLZ zusammenhängen.
>
> Am 2020-12-08 11:32, schrieb andreas wecer:
> > Die Suche nach Ortsnamen sollte besser nicht case-sensitive sein. Um
> > einiges interessanter ist allerdings sowieso die umgekehrte Suche nach
> > PLZ/Vorwahl.
>
> Ja wollte ich eh machen, hatte ich dann aus den Augen verloren. Ist aber
> jetzt behoben.
>
>
> On 07.12.20 12:51, grubernd wrote:
> >  So wie du das implementiert hast ist das ja nur noch super.
>
> Danke :-)
>
>
> > On 06.12.20 18:13, Kevin Kofler via Talk-at wrote:
> >
> >Wobei allerdings generell das Problem ist, daß viele Gemeinden in
> > mehrere
> >Postleitzahlen unterteilt sind, deren Grenzen in den Daten ganz
> >grundsätzlich fehlen, z.B. (nur ein Beispiel von vielen):
> >3400: Klosterneuburg
> >3402: Klosterneuburg
> >3404: Klosterneuburg
> >3420: Kritzendorf
> >3421: Höflein an der Donau
> >die alle nur als Liste in der Gemeinde Klosterneuburg erscheinen und
> > nicht
> >räumlich abgetrennt.)
>
> Da gibt es meiner Meinung nach 2 Möglichkeiten. Einmal sind es
> verschiedene Postämter (bzw deren Nachfolger) in einem Ort. Früher waren
> das wahrscheinlich auch die Startpunkte der Briefträger, was aber heute
> sicher nicht mehr überall übereinstimmt.
>
> Es gibt natürlich viele zusammengelegte Orte, wo mehrere PLZ gültig sind
> für die jeweiligen Bereiche. Ich hab mir mangels Quelle auch aktuell
> nicht die Mühe gemacht, das dann weiter aufzuteilen sondern habe diese
> PLZ und Vorwahlen nur dem (mir sinnvollsten) nächsten Ort gemappt. Hier
> nehme ich gerne Patches an, wenn wer was im Detail näher weiss.
>
> Wens interessiert. Ich hab
>
> https://github.com/pkolmann/austria-post-and-area-code/blob/main/data/mergeData.php
> über 1000 PLZ/Vorwahlen händisch auf Orte gemappt. Da ist sicher noch wo
> ein Wurm drin...
>
> >  Eine Datenlücke kann ich füllen: 2440 Moosbrunn .. Vorwahl 02234
> > Gleich wie Gramatneusiedl, also wären die beiden Gemeinden nach deiner
> > Logik zusammenzulegen.
>
> Aktuell habe ich nur jene Orte in meiner Liste, welche ich aus den
> Offiziellen Daten mappen konnte. Damit bleiben einige schwarze Löcher.
> Das ist mir klar.
> Danke für den Input. Werd ich mal für eine nächste Version im Hinterkopf
> behalten.
>
> > Frage dürfen wir diese, zur Verbesserung und Ergänzung von PLZ
> > Relationen in OpenStretMap verwenden.
>
> Ja kann gerne verwendet werden. Ich habe die Daten auch mithilfe von OSM
> zusammengestellt.
>
> > Die Karte funktioniert sehr gut in den 8 Bundesländern, in denen die
> > Gemeinden kleiner sind als die Bezirke. Leider ist es in Wien
> > andersrum, und
> > deshalb gibt es nur eine große Fläche für das ganze Bundesland (=
> > Gemeinde)
> > mit einer langen Liste Postleitzahlen. Da wäre es sinnvoll, die
> > Gemeinde in
> > Bezirke zu unterteilen. Die Wiener Stadtbezirke erscheinen ja nicht
> > einmal
> > auf deiner "Bezirke"-Karte.
>
> Danke für den Input. Hab ich jetzt auch behoben. Die Orte- und
> Bezirks-Karten hab ich von
> https://github.com/ginseng666/GeoJSON-TopoJSON-Austria und hier fehlten
> sie auch. Ich hab die jetzt mal bei mir nachgetragen. Leider
> überschneiden sich jetzt die Ortsvorwahl und die PLZen. Da ist mir noch
> nichts gscheites dazu eingefallen.
>
>
> > Ortsteile welche der Briefträger von einer anderen Gemeinde aus
> > bedient, die lässt du bei Deiner Karte einfach aus.
>
> Ich wüsste nicht, wo solche Daten öffentlich verfügbar sind
>
> lg
> Philipp
>
> ___
> Talk-at mailing list
> Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
>


-- 
Mst. Johann Haag
Innsbruckerstraße 42
6380 St. Johann in Tirol
ÖSTERREICH
Tel: +43 664/174 

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[osm]

Jeg køber Mikko's forslag. 
 
Vejdirektoratet & COWI definerer vejtypen således:
"En 2 minus 1 vej er en vej, som visuelt kun har én vognbane, der benyttes af 
trafikanter i begge retninger, og hvor der er etableret brudte kantlinjer i 
begge sider af vejen. Kantbanerne benyttes af cyklister og fodgængere og som 
vigeareal, når to modkørende trafikanter mødes. Kantbanerne er ikke forbeholdt 
bløde trafikanter – den brudte kantlinje må gerne overskrides af køretøjer".
 
 

Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 at 4:46 AM
From: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk" 
To: talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
Cc: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen" 
Subject: Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej
Mit forslag er:
highway=*
cycleway=shared_lanes     <- den er ikke til diskussion, for det er hvad det er
Om man derefter vil tagge med en af disse tænker jeg er op til én selv. De 
giver det samme resultat:
lanes=1
oneway=nolanes:both_ways=1 Under alle omstændigheder skal 2-minus-1-veje aldrig 
tagges med lanes=2, da det er en helt anden vejtype som faktisk har to lanes: 
vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A[https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A=photo]
 [mapillary.com]

Om man vil tilføje description=2-minus-1-vej, må være op til en selv.

Det kan der ud over være nyttigt, som Asger Frank skriver, at være på udkig 
efter fartbegrænsninger (de eksisterer nogle, men ikke alle, steder),
og det kan være nyttigt at tjekke bredden på vejen.


___ Talk-dk mailing list 
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk]
 
 

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

[talk-cz] Změny v mapě pro ochranu přírody

[Antonin Tuma via talk-cz]

Dobrý den,

obracíme se na vás jako na provozovatele mapy OpenStreetMap.

Velmi bychom vás prosili o některé změny v mapě, jelikož údaje resp. 
značky v mapě navádějí veřejnost do míst, která jsou jí z důvodu ochrany 
přírody a z důvodu dodržování zákona zapovězena.

Konkrétně v CHKO Moravský kras se jedná o klidová území národních 
přírodních rezervací a zejména míst s velkou a velmi rušivou nelegální 
návštěvností.

Prosili bychom o 
výmaz celé trasy Hviezdoslavova chodníku v NPR Býčí skála, protože zde 
značená cesta byla již před lety zrušena a pokutovaní návštěvníci se 
vymlouvají na váš mapový zákres,
výmaz cesty od jeskyně Kostelík na vyhlídku Krkavčí skála v NPR Býčí 
skála, protože zde značená cesta byla již před lety zrušena a pokutovaní 
návštěvníci se vymlouvají na váš mapový zákres,
výmaz vyhlídek Ruský kříž a Krkavčí skála v NPR Býčí skála, protože 
pokutovaní návštěvníci se vymlouvají na váš mapový zákres,
výmaz názvů Ruský kříž a Partyzánská jeskyně (ideálně i značek) v NPR Býčí 
skála, protože pokutovaní návštěvníci se vymlouvají na váš mapový zákres,
výmaz názvu jeskyně Koňská jáma (ideálně i značky) v NPR Vývěry Punkvy, 
aby název nelákal k návštěvnosti.

Je perfektní, že třeba jeskyni Rytířskou v NPR Vývěry Punkvy a k ní 
zrušenou cestu nezveřejňujete. Proto doufáme, že naší prosbě vyjdete 
vstříc.

Výhrady máme ke značce ohniště, kterou používáte, ale to nechám na jiný 
podrobnější rozbor po prostudování vaší mapy.

V případě dohody rádi nabídneme obohacení vaší mapy jinými značkami a 
místy.

Děkujeme za pochopení a jsem s pozdravem

RNDr. Antonín Tůma
neživá příroda, strážní služba
Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny ČR
Regionální pracoviště Jižní Morava
Oddělení Správa CHKO Moravský kras

Svitavská 29, 678 01 Blansko
516 428 894, 725 737 567
antonin.t...@nature.cz
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[talk-ph] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[arnalie faye vicario]

Forwarded from osmf-talk mailing:

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted
to the conversation in the osm-talk-list (
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced
for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to
diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable
mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve
diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to
sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing


On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin

Comments and signatures are still welcomed!

Thanks and warm regards,
=Arnalie
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk]

Mit forslag er:
|highway=*|
|cycleway=shared_lanes|     <- den er ikke til diskussion, for det er 
hvad det er



Om man derefter vil tagge med en af disse tænker jeg er op til én selv. 
De giver det samme resultat:

|lanes=1|
|oneway=no| |lanes:both_ways=1|

Under alle omstændigheder skal 2-minus-1-veje *aldrig* tagges med 
|lanes=2|, da det er en helt anden vejtype som faktisk har to lanes: 
vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A 
 
[mapillary.com]


Om man vil tilføje |description=2-minus-1-vej|, må være op til en selv.

Det kan der ud over være nyttigt, som Asger Frank skriver, at være på 
udkig efter fartbegrænsninger (de eksisterer nogle, men ikke alle, steder),

og det kan være nyttigt at tjekke bredden på vejen.


___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk]

Men 2-minus-1-veje er jo i virkeligheden tosporede veje med nogle 
sjove markeringer, der angiver, at man skal køre midt på vejen, når 
der ikke er andre i nærheden.
Nej, det er helt almindelige veje, hvor der blot kun er én lane i 
midten,frem for en bredere vej, der for eksempel kunne have to.
Eneste forskel er bredden og om der er plads til en midterstribe også. 
Nøjagtigt samme regelsæt gælder.
Et eksempel på hvor vejen er bredere, fra længe før idéen om konceptet 
2-minus-1-veje opstod: vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A 
 
[mapillary.com]
___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk]

Jeg er helt enig i at det nødvendigvis må være cycleway=shared_lane, da 
den øvrige trafik gerne må benytte pladsen.


On 2020-12-09 23:16, Kim Foder wrote:

I følge den danske wiki er en 2-minus-1 det samme som cycleway=shared_lane.

"Delt cykelbane, der er adskilt fra kørebanen med stiplet kantstribe.
Afstribningen er kun vejledende og motorkøretøjer må bruge cykelbanen hvis
nødvendigt. "To minus en veje" er af denne type. "

/Kim

On onsdag den 9. december 2020 13.00.34 CET Finn Hansen via Talk-dk wrote:

På Fyn ser jeg et væld af 2 minus 1 veje skyde op som paddehatte, men her
har jeg et problem. Er der nogen der ved hvordan man tagger dem?



Lytter1




___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk


___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-se] Reverting undiscussed Lantmäteriet import

[Johan]

Sure, keep the overlapping ones as well. I'll find them. Thanks for making the 
effort.
Johan / 


On 9 December 2020 at 19:45:40 +01:00, Frederik Ramm  
wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/7/20 12:33, Johan wrote:
> 
> > If it would be possible to exclude this region
> > ( from the revert, that
> > would be helpful. I will do QA on all the imported elements, refine,
> > connect and reclassify as needed. If this request poses an unecessarily
> > huge obstacle for the DWG effort to combat this import - please go ahead
> > and revert it all.
> > 
> No problem, I have identified these 125 changesets as lying wholly or
> mostly in that region:
> 
> 94736549
> 94736550
> 94736555
> 94737199
> 94737297
> 94737478
> 94737607
> 94737856
> 94738026
> 94738530
> 94738786
> 94738919
> 94739012
> 94739174
> 94739219
> 94739688
> 94740035
> 94740071
> 94740241
> 94740378
> 94778106
> 94778109
> 94778112
> 94778194
> 94778197
> 94778198
> 94778515
> 94778542
> 94778602
> 94778630
> 94778659
> 94778694
> 94778852
> 94778861
> 94778878
> 94778953
> 94778981
> 94779104
> 94779174
> 94779293
> 94779495
> 94779645
> 94779742
> 94779923
> 94780019
> 94780156
> 94780224
> 94780304
> 94780567
> 94780792
> 94781175
> 94781946
> 94782119
> 94782125
> 94782148
> 94782153
> 94782224
> 94782343
> 94782350
> 94782389
> 94782399
> 94782417
> 94782446
> 94782499
> 94782537
> 94782572
> 94782589
> 94782601
> 94782621
> 94782646
> 94782669
> 94782732
> 94782756
> 94782801
> 94782880
> 94782909
> 94782952
> 94782971
> 94783012
> 94783065
> 94783126
> 94783177
> 94783238
> 94783269
> 94783323
> 94783556
> 94783624
> 94783792
> 94783875
> 94784047
> 94784079
> 94784157
> 94784213
> 94784269
> 94784445
> 94784504
> 94784568
> 94784621
> 94784746
> 94784789
> 94784801
> 94784871
> 94785022
> 94785087
> 94785274
> 94785292
> 94785312
> 94785389
> 94785392
> 94785443
> 94785469
> 94785576
> 94785605
> 94785766
> 94785793
> 95187413
> 95187421
> 95188385
> 95188392
> 95256767
> 95256927
> 95256989
> 95257308
> 95257463
> 
> I will not revert those. A few other changests lie mostly outside the
> area you indicated but do overlap with it; do you want me to keep these too?
> 
> 94737856
> 94738530
> 94739219
> 94778198
> 95187413
> 94736897
> 94736890
> 94736893
> 94736895
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm ## eMail  ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
> ___
> Talk-se mailing list
> Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> 
> 

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Andy Townsend]

Hi Céline, hi all.

Like you, I'm just another participant in this list*.  However, perhaps 
it would be helpful to refer the existing etiquette guidelines adopted 
by the OSMF ages ago: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette .  
It's clear that Frederik's original post didn't abide by all of the 
points under "Mailing Lists" there (which include "Calmly adding to the 
discussion can help keep things tame on the mailing list" among others; 
clearly he did not follow those recommendations).  Rory's already 
rightly called that out at 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085723.html 
("There are many examples of people excusing how Trump acted before the 
2016 election, claiming he would be “presidential” when elected, and you 
had to choose the example regarding sexual assault?").  It's also clear 
that your Google document doesn't abide by those either.  Note that that 
won't be visible to some quite large OSM communities who don't have 
access to Google docs due to US government restrictions.  I did try and 
include the text in this message but that caused it to exceed the list 
message limit; perhaps you could put a copy in the OSM wiki instead 
where everyone can see it?


You write "Power dynamics in OSM are controlled by a dominant 
contributor profile: white, western and male" which I doubt that many 
would disagree with.  However, you go on to say "This power dynamic 
leads to a communication style which includes misogynistic, hostile, 
targeting, doxing, unfriendly, competitive, intimidating, patronising 
messaging, which is offensive to us".


The first "mailing list" item in 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette is "Assume good faith".  I 
would always argue that an attempt at dialogue, which includes both 
sides listening, is always better that an escalation of rhetoric.  That 
doesn't mean there aren't actual "unfriendly"or "hostile" messages 
within OSM channels, as well as messages that were perceived as 
"unfriendly"or "hostile" even when they weren't meant as such, but it 
does mean that actually talking to the real person behind the messages 
is surely the way forward**.  Continuing with "... doxing, competitive, 
intimidating ..." without citing evidence of each of those doesn't add 
weight to the argument; it detracts from it.


That doesn't mean that people who want change have to somehow be 
restricted to "asking nicely" for it (throughout history change has been 
forced by people who refused to "ask nicely" - in the last century the 
Pankhursts, Dietrich Bonhoffer et al, the ANC and Stonewall all spring 
to mind).  It's entirely normal for both sides of a heated argument to 
view the other's as "unreasonable", but hyperbole really doesn't help to 
shed light rather than heat on things. We're all actually trying to 
achieve the same goal here*** and in an election, the community can 
decide whose vision of how to get there is best.


Speaking of which: it's a bit late for this year; but have you thought 
of standing for the board yourself?


Best Regards

Andy

(sending to the list this time after a previous attempt inadvertantly 
went astray)


* full disclosure: I'm a member of OSM's Data Working Group, so am far 
from without agency in OSM - I am also white, western and male.  With a 
DWG hat on I regularly see problems escalated to us where the language 
used has got more than a little out of control. 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-November/085658.html 
is pretty typical of the approach I'll try and use in those cases


** In the world of OSM edits I'm a huge fan of changeset discussion 
comments as the primary means of discussing an edit that has been made.  
They're not a perfect mechanism, but the fact that they're public and 
inherently person-to-person helps to detoxify dialogue.


*** I'm sure that both Michal and Frederik are striving for what they 
genuinely believe is best for OSM.  The fact that they fundamentally 
disagree about how to achieve that doesn't mean that one or the other is 
acting in bad faith.


On 09/12/2020 19:06, Celine Jacquin wrote:


Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have 
reacted to the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html 
) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have 
faced for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest 
obstacles to diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the 
desirable mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and 
improve diversity.


We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented 
to sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):

Re: [Talk-at] Gefahr durch Internet-Bergrouten

[Friedrich Volkmann]

On 09.12.20 21:40, Robert Grübler wrote:

Die Entscheidung der DWG halte ich für richtig, als T6 Wanderweg mappen und im note 
vermerken "das ist eine Kletterroute" das geht nicht.


Wie ich schon tausendmal geschrieben habe, gibt es zwischen Wandern und 
Klettern keine klare Trennlinie.



Zumal aus der Versionsgeschichte hervorgeht, dass es dort schon mehrmals zu 
gefährlichen Situationen kam.


Dann muss man dort ansetzen, wo der Fehler passiert: In den Apps, vor Ort 
(Warntafeln) und ggf. auch in den Schulen (die Kinder müssen lernen, was 
fürs Leben wichtig ist, und da gehört heute auch dazu, Navis richtig 
anzuwenden und nicht alles zu glauben, was einem angezeigt wird; überhaupt 
sollte jungen Menschen wieder beigebracht werden, das eigene Hirn zu verwenden).



Das „sport=climbing“ in der Luft hängt ist unschön, sollte sich aber mit einem 
passenden natural=* einfach beheben lassen.


Es gibt kein passendes lineares natural. Eine Wander- oder Kletterroute ist 
was Menschengemachtes und ich kenne keine, die vom Einstieg bis zum Ausstieg 
genau einer Gratkante folgt.



Auch climbing=route am Weg bietet sich an 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Climbing#Climbing_Routes )

Das Problem gibt es nicht nur in Kanada. Zwei Beispiele:

1.) Weg zum Tuxeck
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/125672765
Ein 7m hoher, senkrechter Kamin im UIAA Grad 3 ist doch kein T6 Wanderweg. Oder?

2.) Wiederroute auf die Watzmann-Mittelspitze
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1959910
Die Relation ist eine Kletterroute (diesen Relationstyp finde ich im Wiki 
nicht) mit UIAA-Grad 3, der darunterliegende Weg ist ein T6 path!


Natürlich ist dritter Grad kein Wanderweg, aber die Grenze fix zwischen 2 
und 3 anzusetzen finde ich zu unelastisch, nicht nur weil die 
Schwierigkeitsangaben subjektiv sind (z.B. für den unteren Herminensteig am 
Schneeberg gibt es in der Literatur Schwierigkeitsangaben von 1+ bis 2+), 
sondern auch auch andere Faktoren mit reinspielen:


1.) Die Region: Auf dem Matterhorn ist der Normalweg ein 3+, aber eben der 
einfachste Anstieg, über den sich jährlich Tausende wälzen und auf dem 
Fixseile hängen. In einer Tiefebene hingegen wird man sogar einen 1er als 
Kletterei empfinden. Es ist genauso bei Höhlen (in Ungarn zählen sie ab 3m 
als katasterwürdig, in Österreich ab 5m), Straßen (eine zweispurige Straße 
in der Wüste hat einen anderen Stellenwert als in einer Millionenstadt) usw.


2.) Markierung: Eine markierte Route (z.B. Preintalersteig auf der Rax) ist 
was anderes als ein nur in der Literatur beschriebener Anstieg, von dem vor 
Ort nichts zu sehen ist. Die Markierungen und Einstiegskennzeichnungen sind 
sogar dann, wenn man diese Route nicht geht, für die Orientierung in der 
Umgebung hilfreich.


3.) Bekanntheit, beliebtes Ausflugsziel: Tausende Ungarn, Tschechen, 
Slowaken kommen jedes Jahr um den Haidsteig zu begehen. Es wäre unpraktisch, 
wenn sie ihn in der Karte nicht finden würden.


4.) Dichte: Wenn man zig Routen in einem Klettergarten alle als path mappt 
und die Zugangswege ebenfalls path sind, kennt sich keiner mehr aus.



Ich finde, die DWG sollte die Einzelentscheidung generalisieren.


Ich finde, das geht sie gar nichts an. Das ist Sache der lokalen Mapper, und 
für eine Vereinheitlichung kann man im Wiki diskutieren und Proposals schreiben.



Für mich liegt die Begründung in der Definition von „path“( 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath ):
„ highway=path is a generic path, either multi-use or unspecified usage, open 
to all non-motorized vehicles …”


Demnach dürften wir so ziemlich gar keine Wege als path mappen, denn 
Fahrzeuge sind auf fast allen Pfaden in Österreich verboten.


Diese Definition stammt wahrscheinlich noch aus der Urzeit, als highway=path 
mit access-Tags als generisches Äquivalent zu 
highway=footway/cycleway/bridleway etc. aufgefasst wurde.


--
Friedrich K. Volkmann   http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[ndrw]

Sorry for adding to the noise but this is important. Quote from the 
document:


   Changes to form part of OSMFs agenda over the coming 1-2 years:

1.

   Make Working Groups and OSM activities more equitable: the
   Diversity and Inclusion special committee should actively work
   to consult, analyze and understand the structural limitations of
   under-represented people to participate, though permanent
   consultation and communication mechanism, and improve openness
   in the Working Groups and OSM activities.

2.

   Official governance roles should be accountable to diversity and
   inclusion: OSMF Board and Working Group members should take
   Diversity & Inclusion (D) training, and sign D statements.
   This should also be available to all local chapters and
   community members.

3.

   Support Diversity and equality for Local Chapters, recognizing
   that constituencies have different legal frameworks and contexts.

4.

   Create anInclusive Framework for Board Members to explicitly be
   aware of the accountabilities regarding DEI with their roles. A
   non-partisan community facilitator could provide support for
   thisforthis.

It is an attempt to forcefully change OSMF governance, pure and simple, 
and I strongly disagree with that. OSMF exists to promote use of 
openstreetmap and to encourage people to map. Inclusivity and diversity 
fit these goals and are well established in OSM (something I can attest 
to personally) but they are /not/ goals on their own.


Above proposals go far beyond inclusivity and diversity. In fact, points 
1, 2 and 4 directly violate them and as such they have no place in OSM.


It is fine to /create/ an organization or a political party to promote 
new ideas. It is /not/ fine to /hijack/ an existing and successful 
organization and change its charter against its existing members.



As for Frederic's email:

- It does not represent a systemic failure of OSMF or OSM in general. In 
fact, it attracted considerable amount of criticism for what it was.


- It was off-topic, unnecessary and in very poor taste (quite vulgar, 
frankly) but it was not harming anyone except Donald Trump and Mike (by 
unfairly comparing him to DT).



ndrw6


On 09/12/2020 19:06, Celine Jacquin wrote:

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have 
reacted to the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html 
) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have 
faced for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest 
obstacles to diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the 
desirable mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and 
improve diversity.


We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented 
to sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing 




On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[mides.map]

  
  
L'idée de filtrage par département est
  pas mal pour "élaguer" un peu, j'ai donc filtré les entités qui
  possèdent le tag  tourism=alpine_hut et  name = '%refuge%'. 

Reste à se pencher d'un peu plus près
  sur cette liste en sachant que je ne me retrouve pas face à 739
  structures mais 386. C'est un peu plus abordable pour contrôler !
  :-) 



Ce qui peut donner : 




  
 
  
Savoie
83
  
  
Haute-Savoie
68
  
  
Hautes-Alpes
47
  
  
Isère
38
  
  
Haut-Rhin
18
  
  
Pyrénées-Orientales
17
  
  
Hautes-Pyrénées
17
  
  
Alpes-Maritimes
13
  
  
Haute-Corse
11
  
  
Ariège
9
  
  
Alpes-de-Haute-Provence
9
  
  
Corse-du-Sud
9
  
  
Pyrénées-Atlantiques
7
  
  
Haute-Garonne
5
  
  
Bas-Rhin
4
  
  
Guadeloupe
4
  
  
Bouches-du-Rhône
3
  
  
Ain
3
  
  
Territoire de Belfort
3
  
  
Cantal
2
  
  
Puy-de-Dôme
2
  
  
Vosges
2
  
  
Drôme
2
  
  
Martinique
2
  
  
La Réunion
2
  
  
Loire
1
  
  
Tarn
1
  
  
Ardèche
1
  
  
Doubs
1
  
  
Côte-d'Or
1
  
  
Haute-Saône
1
  

  





Le 09/12/2020 à 23:31, Jacques
  Lavignotte a écrit :

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/111u
  
  
  remonte les refuges :
  
  
  Haute-Savoie, Isère, Hautes-Alpes
  
  
  
  
  
  Le 09/12/2020 à 23:24, mides.map a écrit :
  
  C'est un peu là le problème, on ne
s'attend pas à trouver une structure classée "refuge d'altitude"
dans ce type de zone géographique.


Le 09/12/2020 à 22:57, Eric SIBERT via Talk-fr a écrit :

Et que dire du refuge CAF de
  Bonneval-sur-Arc?
  
  
http://www.refuges.info/point/110/cabane-non-gardee/Mont-Cenis-Grand-Paradis/Chalet-de-Bonneval-sur-Arc/
  
  https://chaletbonnevalsurarc.ffcam.fr/
  
  
  En zone résidentielle et à 50 m de la mairie ;-)
  
  
  Eric
  
  
  ___
  
  Talk-fr mailing list
  
  Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
  
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
  




___

Talk-fr mailing list

Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

  
  



  


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[Jacques Lavignotte]

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/111u

remonte les refuges :

Haute-Savoie, Isère, Hautes-Alpes




Le 09/12/2020 à 23:24, mides.map a écrit :
C'est un peu là le problème, on ne s'attend pas à trouver une structure 
classée "refuge d'altitude" dans ce type de zone géographique.


Le 09/12/2020 à 22:57, Eric SIBERT via Talk-fr a écrit :

Et que dire du refuge CAF de Bonneval-sur-Arc?

http://www.refuges.info/point/110/cabane-non-gardee/Mont-Cenis-Grand-Paradis/Chalet-de-Bonneval-sur-Arc/ 


https://chaletbonnevalsurarc.ffcam.fr/

En zone résidentielle et à 50 m de la mairie ;-)

Eric

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr


--
GnuPg : 156520BBC8F5B1E3 Because privacy matters.
« Quand est-ce qu'on mange ? » AD (c) (tm)

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[mides.map]

C'est un peu là le problème, on ne s'attend pas à trouver une structure 
classée "refuge d'altitude" dans ce type de zone géographique.


Le 09/12/2020 à 22:57, Eric SIBERT via Talk-fr a écrit :

Et que dire du refuge CAF de Bonneval-sur-Arc?

http://www.refuges.info/point/110/cabane-non-gardee/Mont-Cenis-Grand-Paradis/Chalet-de-Bonneval-sur-Arc/ 


https://chaletbonnevalsurarc.ffcam.fr/

En zone résidentielle et à 50 m de la mairie ;-)

Eric

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Kim Foder]

I følge den danske wiki er en 2-minus-1 det samme som cycleway=shared_lane.

"Delt cykelbane, der er adskilt fra kørebanen med stiplet kantstribe. 
Afstribningen er kun vejledende og motorkøretøjer må bruge cykelbanen hvis 
nødvendigt. "To minus en veje" er af denne type. "

/Kim

On onsdag den 9. december 2020 13.00.34 CET Finn Hansen via Talk-dk wrote:
> På Fyn ser jeg et væld af 2 minus 1 veje skyde op som paddehatte, men her
> har jeg et problem. Er der nogen der ved hvordan man tagger dem?
> 
> 
> 
> Lytter1




___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[Jacques Lavignotte]

Le 09/12/2020 à 21:11, mides.map a écrit :


Apparemment sélection difficile/délicate pour avoir ces données.


Une approche : trier par département...

--
GnuPg : 156520BBC8F5B1E3 Because privacy matters.
« Quand est-ce qu'on mange ? » AD (c) (tm)

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[Eric SIBERT via Talk-fr]

Et que dire du refuge CAF de Bonneval-sur-Arc?

http://www.refuges.info/point/110/cabane-non-gardee/Mont-Cenis-Grand-Paradis/Chalet-de-Bonneval-sur-Arc/
https://chaletbonnevalsurarc.ffcam.fr/

En zone résidentielle et à 50 m de la mairie ;-)

Eric

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

Considering the reaction - especially strong in the USA, and the fact 
that I'm a candidate to the Board of the Openstreetmap Foundation, I 
suppose I have to make a statement of my position.


In preamble, I condemn the use of sexual assault metaphor - that has no 
place anywhere.


In understand that the form of assertiveness traditional in mailing 
lists and forums can be off-putting. I may be part of that problem 
because, even as I dislike aggressive tones, I take dealing with them as 
a cost of doing business. That may be part of why different communities 
have fostered their own communications channels - I can't stand a 
Facebook thread, a pile of Slack channels or Discord noise for a minute 
but I'm happy that each village decorates his pub in his own taste. 
There is more to Openstreetmap than the @openstreetmap.org mailing 
lists... I would even bet that their population is considerably smaller 
nowadays than the communities that have flourished elsewhere. Users have 
mitigated the problem with their feet - compounding the trend of younger 
ones not even considering mailing lists as an appropriate channel at 
all. Do my white hair show yet ?


On the other hand, let's not take fragmentation as an excuse for failing 
to consider improvement potential. A couple of years ago, in a diary 
Heather Leson posted Public Lab's code of conduct 
(https://publiclab.org/conduct). My first reaction at the concept was to 
consider it infantilizing - can't we all exercise common sense ? It took 
me a while to connect that to my old intercultural management courses at 
ESSCA: when people from different cultures interact, there is no common 
sense pre-existing - it must be built. It follows that, while clumsy, 
starting with explicit norms may be an an effective way to bootstrap 
common sense among an highly diverse population. So count me in !


That said, I do not understand how a community where the barrier to 
entry is as low as editing a node can be perceived as gatekeeping. I 
never asked for anyone's permission to do anything in Openstreetmap - I 
just tried things, sometimes in hilariously wrong ways... The do-ocracy 
isn't a myth, everything really is up to us. And none of that requires 
any specific genital configuration. So, the explanation for the male 
majority in the visible Openstreetmap community has to lie elsewhere.


As I failed to answer the "What will you do to encourage more women 
leaders in OSM working groups and governance?" official question (it was 
an involuntary oversight, but I don't expect anyone to believe me), as a 
lazy pupil I'll copy my neighbor's excellent answer - Roland Olbricht 
put it better than I could have:


"As a first step, we should be bluntly honest: We as OSM have no idea 
what is actually keeping people from candidating for positions. Or 
electing them: all elected candidates last year were male despite at 
least on female candidate. Or contributing in general.


Honestly again, I consider the lack of diversity primarily as a missed 
opportunity of growth and resilience. There are probably many people out 
there who both can and want to engage with OSM, even if rather as a mean 
than an end. Our community probably could triple if we get those people 
involved and excited.


Various things have been tried, but we have not seen any significant 
progress, even after years. Again, we don't know whether we are doing 
not enough of the initiatives or simply not the right things. It is time 
to compare to other similar organizations and settings that attract 
minorities better, and to scrutinize whether we can learn from them. The 
gender ratio of math students in Germany has been eased to be almost 
balanced, many years after it was discovered that school teachers 
actively and massively talked down girl's math competences. In that 
case, the true origin of the problem has been entirely outside the 
institution where the problem has been observed"


Put it on account of my male-biased point of view if you will, but I 
believe there are obstacle to participation more significant than 
gender. Local communities overcome the language barrier by producing 
documentation in their own idiom - but the software's world alignment on 
English remains a strong barrier. In every African country I have 
visited, the cost of Internet access keeps many willing souls from 
taking part in Openstreetmap. Leisure time is luxury - many of my 
African friends do not understand why I spend time on pursuits that do 
not improve my income. So barriers to entry do exist - but they may not 
be those that produce the most outrage in our circles. So I support that 
statement from the call to action: "Diversity and Inclusion special 
committee should actively work to consult, analyze and understand the 
structural limitations of under-represented people to participate".


Finally, writing one's name in signature of a text that evolves after 
you have signed it feels foolish to me - but then again, 

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Clay Smalley]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 4:08 PM john whelan  wrote:

> In the diverse collection of people we have in OSM you will be hard
> pressed not to offend someone.
>

Really? That hasn't been a problem for me.

I hadn't realised the name Kathleen was one that either gender could use
> and I apologise for making an assumption about the gender of the person
> using it.
>

I typed out my message and sent it before my mail client refreshed and
showed Kathleen's reply. She's clearly a woman. Quit being obtuse.

-Clay (they/them)

>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] I'm no-one's stooge!  | | Re: Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Rory McCann]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, at 21:46, Darafei Praliaskouski via talk wrote:
> That was done by a former board member, an employee/owner of a company 
> that has a seating board member, and if we mirror the whole thing - 
> "done to protect Geofabrik's investment into having a seat on the 
> board". Of course, such an interpretation will not be acceptable for 
> current board member, employee of Geofabrik and expectedly a report of 
> Frederik.

wait what? I'm the  OSMF Board Member in question, and Frederik is my boss, and 
who in non-corona times, I'd see every day.

I posted a reply to the thread: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085723.html

Rory

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[john whelan]

In the diverse collection of people we have in OSM you will be hard pressed
not to offend someone.  The views held are very diverse.  Traffic_signal or
traffic_light tagging us an example of very diverse views.  I'm sure
someone will be along and give me the correct way to tag shortly.

I hadn't realised the name Kathleen was one that either gender could use
and I apologise for making an assumption about the gender of the person
using it.

Cheerio John

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 16:00 Clay Smalley  wrote:

> I'm noticing a pattern here in the replies to this email:
>
> Only men have replied. This is, unfortunately, par for the course on the
> OSM mailing lists. The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact.
> The simplest explanation for this is the systematic institutional hostility
> towards women in the OSM community. The replies themselves are the best
> evidence of this.
>
> These men replying have taken it upon themselves to explain to a woman
> what constitutes misogyny. News flash: you do not get to decide what
> offends other people. If you are a man, misogyny will never happen to you
> by definition. If you are a man, you have never been, are not, and will
> never be a victim of misogyny. This isn't your area of expertise. Listen to
> the experts.
>
> Some men replying have even mentioned how this draft letter hurts their
> feelings. These men need to slow down and consider for a moment that their
> temporarily hurt feelings are less important than the safety of women.
> Men's feelings are irrelevant to issues where women are victims.
>
> As far as I know, various OSM-affiliated groups have codes of conduct, but
> there isn't one governing these mailing lists. We need to adopt a code of
> conduct yesterday.
>
> -Clay (they/them)
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:13 PM Celine Jacquin  wrote:
>
>> Hello everybody
>> I hope you are all well
>>
>> We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted
>> to the conversation in the osm-talk-list (
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
>> considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced
>> for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to
>> diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
>> That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable
>> mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve
>> diversity.
>>
>> We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to
>> sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>>
>> On behalf of the signatories
>> Best regards
>>
>> Céline Jacquin
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
> ___
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Clay Smalley]

I'm noticing a pattern here in the replies to this email:

Only men have replied. This is, unfortunately, par for the course on the
OSM mailing lists. The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact.
The simplest explanation for this is the systematic institutional hostility
towards women in the OSM community. The replies themselves are the best
evidence of this.

These men replying have taken it upon themselves to explain to a woman what
constitutes misogyny. News flash: you do not get to decide what offends
other people. If you are a man, misogyny will never happen to you by
definition. If you are a man, you have never been, are not, and will never
be a victim of misogyny. This isn't your area of expertise. Listen to the
experts.

Some men replying have even mentioned how this draft letter hurts their
feelings. These men need to slow down and consider for a moment that their
temporarily hurt feelings are less important than the safety of women.
Men's feelings are irrelevant to issues where women are victims.

As far as I know, various OSM-affiliated groups have codes of conduct, but
there isn't one governing these mailing lists. We need to adopt a code of
conduct yesterday.

-Clay (they/them)

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:13 PM Celine Jacquin  wrote:

> Hello everybody
> I hope you are all well
>
> We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted
> to the conversation in the osm-talk-list (
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
> considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced
> for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to
> diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
> That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable
> mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve
> diversity.
>
> We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to
> sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> On behalf of the signatories
> Best regards
>
> Céline Jacquin
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk-ie] Bing satellite image replaced

[Ciarán Staunton]

Evolving, so not definitive: However, it looks like the Bing imagery is
gone, what is in its place in much of Ireland is just a repackaged ESRI
globe, of course rectified differently to what was there before. I assume
we will put more updates here as we see what has been done around Ireland.
I assume also that the change is wider than Ireland. The imagery lacks
clarity/sharpness, and having the same image as ESRI globe is hardly
healthy in terms of source diversity. Does anyone know if Bing even had the
courtesy to warn, or consult about this happening, or indeed why the change
took place?




Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[john whelan]

No but I am suggesting dealing with it is complex and has to be done over
time.  Do you ban jargon for example?

The danger in Celine's confrontational approach is we throw the baby out
with the dish water.

You have an interesting mind and know the background.  How would you
approach this?

And yes I admit to being white male etc.

Many Thanks for your thoughts.

Cheerio John

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 15:45 Kathleen Lu  wrote:

> > Many females do not map using their own name but will use a male
> sounding name to avoid problems.
>
> John, are you seriously citing this as evidence that there is not
> pervasive misogyny in the OSM community?
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

when I write something on a mailing list, it is clear that I am the
author and that I have to take responsibility for what I write. If I
write bullshit, people will rightly point out my mistakes. If I offend
someone, it is clear who the offending party is.

This document that you have published here "on behalf of the
signatories" contains a number of accusations against me, but unlike on
a mailing list I am not told who has been making these accusations, and
I am not able to represent myself in the same forum where the
accusations are made. I would like to dispute the claim that I was using
"dehumanizing language", but I fear that you have already spread your
claim to the world without giving me that opportunity.

I assume that the moral legitimacy for such an action comes from the
assumption that I am somehow higher up some pecking order, and that it
is always ok to attack those who are somehow "above", even with unfair
means, because them being higher up means that the playing field is not
fair to begin with. In order to bolster that claim, I am being made into
more than just an average human being: I am "past board member of OSMF"
(true), "administrator on four mailing lists" (unsure), and "member of
many working groups" (false, it is only one).

I might be an administrator on some mailing lists. I remember recently
writing to a co-admin of osmf-talk because I had lost the password. This
is not a job that in OSM's reality carries actual responsibility, or
power. I cannot remember a single instance where I have used special
powers of a mailing list moderator. This is a job that, in OSM, is
passed around to whoever doesn't run away fast enough. At most it
involves logging in to the web interface and debugging someone's
complaint why their emails don't get through. It is literally not worth
mentioning.

Why am I going on about this? I have never used this mailing list
"power" for good or bad, nor is it advertised anywhere to embiggen my
status. Why, therefore, do the authors of the document choose to make a
big deal out of that? It does sound grand to an outsider, right?
Administrator of four mailing lists, by golly, that must be an
influential person, right? But we all know that it has zero meaning. So
either that particular "fact" has been introduced into the document by
someone who is not at all familiar with how things run around here -
someone who lacks the cultural closeness to the medium to judge what is
happening there - OR it has been written by someone who knows precisely
that being a mailing list administrator counts for nothing, but has
included that fact anyway, deliberately misleading an outside audience.

Same with the "member of many working groups". I am saddened by the hate
that I read in your document, but I am even more saddened by the fact
that whoever hates me so didn't even care to get these facts right.

I think that some of the suggestions you make have merit, and I find it
very unfortunate that you're basically asking people to sign off on your
list of good suggestions with a small aside of "BTW this Frederik Ramm
guy has sent a dehumanizing message". Supporters of your document don't
even get the option of saying "agree on your plan, but don't agree on
the moral judgement you're passing on this one named person." You might
be right about some of the systemic issues you list in your document,
but making me the only named bad person in your document and therefore,
by implication, an example of all that is wrong in OSM, has a sour taste.

It is not an instrument that you would wish other people use against
you. You shouldn't, therefore, use it against me. The unnamed authors of
the document should have the dignity to separate the quarrel they have
with me from the quarrel they have with systemic issues in OSM.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Darafei Praliaskouski via talk]

Hello,

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:48 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:

> I have been silent about this but when a document is drafted where only
> supporters will be heard, I have to speak out in Frederiks support.
> I have seen no systemic aggressive behaviour that demotivates and
> excludes participation by women and minority groups in OSM or behaviour
> that degrades the spirit of open community culture, and damages the
> OpenStreetMap reputation from Frederik.
>

Basically, a person (who is a board candidate) was denied to be able to own
their own will, substituted with their employer, and insulted in a way that
I cannot construct a way of self-defense from.

That was done by a former board member, an employee/owner of a company that
has a seating board member, and if we mirror the whole thing - "done to
protect Geofabrik's investment into having a seat on the board". Of course,
such an interpretation will not be acceptable for current board member,
employee of Geofabrik and expectedly a report of Frederik.

For some reason this aggressive gatekeeping behavior to secure a board seat
from a small company is tolerated and comes unnoticed. I believe if you
think Frederik's behavior is okay there, you are indeed a part of a
problem, to my view. Michal has decades of experience in cartography & OSM
before joining FB, but that is erased and ignored by Frederik in
unacceptable fashion.

I support the document below.


>
> On 2020-12-09 20:06, Celine Jacquin wrote:
> > Hello everybody
> > I hope you are all well
> >
> > We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have
> > reacted to the conversation in the osm-talk-list
> > (
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
> > considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have
> > faced for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest
> > obstacles to diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real
> > change.That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the
> > desirable mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and
> > improve diversity.
> >
> > We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented
> > to sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> > On behalf of the signatories
>


Darafei,
as an individual who's with OSM from 2008.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Kathleen Lu via talk]

> Many females do not map using their own name but will use a male sounding 
> name to avoid problems.

John, are you seriously citing this as evidence that there is not
pervasive misogyny in the OSM community?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Niels Elgaard Larsen]

o...@workmail.com:

Forslag:
  
highway=residential


Kun hvis de er residential.
De fleste, jeg har set, er unclassified.


Jeg mener ikke, at man skal tagge med lanes=1 når to køretøjer godt kan passere 
hinanden.


lanes=1

> lanes:both_ways=1

Den kombinationer er nævnt i diskussionen til wikisiden.

Men jeg er ikke sikker på, at lanes:both_ways er beregnet til det.

Det nærmeste wikien kommer på det er:

==
There exist roads with no marked lanes, which are two-way roads but without marked 
lanes and so narrow, that vehicles must slow down to pass each other. It is strongly 
recommended in such a case to tag the width of the carriageway using width=* (Note: 
do not mistake this with maxwidth=*). If the width varies a lot, the minimum width of 
the carriageway should be specified. If it is not possible or reasonable to determine 
the exact width, use an estimation and tag additionally source:width=estimated, e.g. 
as follows:


 width=4
 source:width=estimated
==

2-1 veje har en markeret bane, men to biler kan passere hinanden, hvis de trækker 
lidt ud til siden.


Og hvis det fx er to motorcykler, kan de jo nemt passere hinanden.

Så i steder for lanes, synes jeg man bør bruge width



cycleway=lane


Det er ikke en rigtig cykelsti. Fx må biler som udgangspunkt parkere i siderne af 
vejen. Og som cyklist skal man også være opmærksom på at biler må køre der, selvom de 
skal vise hensyn til cyklister og gående.




Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2020 at 1:00 PM
From: "Finn Hansen via Talk-dk" 
To: "'OpenStreetMap Denmark'" 
Cc: "Finn Hansen" 
Subject: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

På Fyn ser jeg et væld af 2 minus 1 veje skyde op som paddehatte, men her har 
jeg et problem. Er der nogen der ved hvordan man tagger dem?
  
Lytter1

___ Talk-dk mailing list 
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
  
  


___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk




--
Niels Elgaard Larsen

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-at] Gefahr durch Internet-Bergrouten

[Robert Grübler]

Am 6. Dezember 2020 schrieb Kevin Kofler:

> Leider wurde für den dort besprochenen Trail die "Lösung" implementiert, 
> den highway=path Tag ersatzlos zu löschen, sodaß die Kletterroute wohl auch 
> für diejenigen nicht mehr sichtbar ist, für die sie ursprünglich gemappt 
> wurde. 
> (Nein, sport=climbing ist kein ausreichender Tag, wenn nicht zugleich 
> irgendein Basistag gesetzt ist, 
> der beschreibt, worum es sich bei der Linie überhaupt handelt.) Aber das ist 
> eine DWG-Entscheidung 
> und betrifft zudem Kanada, also werden wir hier auf talk-at eher nichts daran 
> ändern können.

Die Entscheidung der DWG halte ich für richtig, als T6 Wanderweg mappen und im 
note vermerken "das ist eine Kletterroute" das geht nicht. Zumal aus der 
Versionsgeschichte hervorgeht, dass es dort schon mehrmals zu gefährlichen 
Situationen kam.

Das „sport=climbing“ in der Luft hängt ist unschön, sollte sich aber mit einem 
passenden natural=* einfach beheben lassen.
Auch climbing=route am Weg bietet sich an 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Climbing#Climbing_Routes )

Das Problem gibt es nicht nur in Kanada. Zwei Beispiele:

1.) Weg zum Tuxeck
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/125672765 
Ein 7m hoher, senkrechter Kamin im UIAA Grad 3 ist doch kein T6 Wanderweg. Oder?

2.) Wiederroute auf die Watzmann-Mittelspitze
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1959910  
Die Relation ist eine Kletterroute (diesen Relationstyp finde ich im Wiki 
nicht) mit UIAA-Grad 3, der darunterliegende Weg ist ein T6 path!


Ich finde, die DWG sollte die Einzelentscheidung generalisieren.

Für mich liegt die Begründung in der Definition von „path“( 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath ):
„ highway=path is a generic path, either multi-use or unspecified usage, open 
to all non-motorized vehicles …”
Hier liegt die Betonung eindeutig auf die Verkehrsfläche und ist damit auch ein 
Weg im Sinne des §2 StVO 1960 und des §1319a(2) ABGB. Ein T6 path geht weit 
über eine Verkehrsfläche hinaus und hat viel mehr Ähnlichkeit mit einer 
Kletterroute.

LG Robert


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Niels Elgaard Larsen]

Celine Jacquin:

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well


I have not commented on this before because I thought it was better to just let 
it pass.

It was not a very elegant email.
But it was not misogynistic.

I did not think it was offensive or dehumanizing.
Maybe Trumps words were, but that does not mean that Ramm's paraphrasing was.
Just as Céline Jacquin's email here is not offensive because she links to a webpage 
that contains the exact same words.


There is only one person that could be offended by Ramms's email and that is Michal 
Migurski. I note that he is endorsing your statement. I had hoped that he would argue 
that the comparison was wrong or unfair.



We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted to the 
conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html 
) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced for many 
years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to diversity at all 
levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable mechanisms to 
work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve diversity.


We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to sign it. 
Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing 




On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




--
Niels Elgaard Larsen

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Asger Frank]

Ja, kun i alt ét spor for bilisterne, og som benyttes i begge retninger (på 
skift, så at sige). 

Vi talte om den type veje da Vejdirektoratet introducerede dem i 2015: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-dk/2015-November/004408.html 

Dengang uden nærmere vedrørende tagging, men der var et forslag om “indtil 
videre"
at mærke dem description=2-minus-1-vej

Jeg har siden tagget nogle sådanne, med forsøg på at bruge logikken; 
resultatet er meget i tråd med osmviborgs forslag:

highway=residential
lanes=1
cycleway=lane
description=2-minus-1-vej

Undervejs har jeg faktisk savnet noget der udtrykkeligt viser at der ikke 
mangler en retningstagging, 
og havde overvejet oneway=no, men lanes:both_ways=1 lyder også som en mulighed.
Sandt at sige ved jeg ikke hvilken at foretrække, for de synes ret ens.

Jeg har ikke umiddelbart kunnet finde en udenlandsk tradition for tagging af 
2-minus-1-vej

Ser man en 2-minus-1-vej kan man forresten godt holde udkig efter en oftest 40 
km/t hastighedsgrænse/zone 
og fartdæmpende forstaltninger, for som regel har vejtypen de 2 ledsagere, men 
det er vist kun en anbefaling:
https://idekatalogforcykeltrafik.dk/2-minus-1-veje/

.
- Asger


> Den 9. dec. 2020 kl. 17.21 skrev o...@workmail.com:
> 
> "På en 2 minus 1 vej er der kun ét spor for bilisterne".
> https://www.vejdirektoratet.dk/pressemeddelelse/er-du-klar-til-moede-en-2-minus-1-vej
>  
> 
> 
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2020 at 5:10 PM
>> From: "Jørgen Elgaard Larsen" 
>> To: "OpenStreetMap Denmark" 
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej
>> Det er et godt spørgsmål.
>> 
>> lanes=1 er ikke helt godt, for det betyder jo, at der kun er én bane. 
>> Det vil de fleste nok tolke som om, at to modkørende biler ikke kan 
>> passere hinanden.
>> 
>> Men 2-minus-1-veje er jo i virkeligheden tosporede veje med nogle sjove 
>> markeringer, der angiver, at man skal køre midt på vejen, når der ikke 
>> er andre i nærheden.
>> 
>> 
>> - Jørgen
>> 
>> 
>> o...@workmail.com skrev den 2020-12-09 13:40:
>>> Forslag:
>>>  
>>> highway=residential
>>> lanes=1
>>> lanes:both_ways=1
>>> cycleway=lane
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-dk mailing list
>> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
>> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-dk mailing list
> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[John Whelan]

The issue of diversity is complex.  In Africa many of the locals whilst 
feeling that it would be nice to have all local mappers they recognise 
that the map would not be as complete without the armchair mappers.


Unfortunately when you work in technical areas often you'll see a group 
build up expertise over time.  These people have the frame work if you 
like to to see how things fit together and it is how things like 
overpass have come about.


Fredrick is one of those people who has a great deal of knowledge and 
OpenStreetMap would be much poorer without him.


It does take time to build up expertise and to take part in the 
discussions in a meaningful way.  However using terms such as "*This 
power dynamic leads to a communication style which includes 
misogynistic, hostile, targeting, doxing, unfriendly, competitive, 
intimidating, patronising messaging, which is offensive to us and forces 
many of us to remain as observers and without the confidence to 
participate actively" I think is purely destructive. Recognise that some 
of the wording you will come across is pure jargon. It works because the 
group the communication is taking place is to some extent closed and 
jargon gets the message across effectively and quickly. Communication 
that is more general does need the "can a six year old understand this 
approach". *
I also have an issue with expecting everyone to conform to a set of 
social norms, I can think of at least one mapper who is obsessive over 
tiny details and goes to great lengths to get them right on the map.  
However his social interactions may seem a bit abrupt to some.  His 
mapping contributions though are extremely valuable.


I also have an issue with those who say we don't have enough female 
mappers. Many females do not map using their own name but will use a 
male sounding name to avoid problems.  Hence you cannot say with any 
accuracy just how many mappers are male orfemale.


If you feel that OpenStreetMap is not open enough then there are forks 
that you can join inor you can build your own.


OpenStreetMap does respect local mappers points of view, which I think 
addresses your comments about minorities. Which is why the map uses 
different conventionsin different places.


However that brings us back to the problem of how decisions are made.  
Certainly in Africa the NGOs have played a part in pushing for 
consistent tags and tagging standards and I am happy to accept that 
those who coordinated the efforts where often white, etc etc but they 
did consult with everyone who would talk to them.  Things like purdah 
can be an issue.  Communicating through a six year old because his 
mother was in purdah means mother's views may not be communicated easily.


Cheerio John


Celine Jacquin wrote on 2020-12-09 14:06:

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have 
reacted to the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have 
faced for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest 
obstacles to diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the 
desirable mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and 
improve diversity.


We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented 
to sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):

https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing


On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


--
Sent from Postbox 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Diversity-talk] Etiquette Guidelines bad | Re: Code of conduct

[Jo Walsh]

I continue to stand by the statement that a community CoC is there to protect 
under-represented people, not to enable privileged folks to tone police one 
other. In reverting edits and applying temporary blocks, one must look at 
intention not behaviour. 

Also everyone's on edge now for reasons that go far beyond OSM, fearful for our 
jobs, worried for our friends and families, deprived of our daily distractions 
and outlets, in the depths of midwinter. As appeasing as it may seem, give this 
time. Don't let go of the structural momentum for culture change, but do give 
one another time right now.


zx

-- 
  Jo Walsh
  metaz...@fastmail.net

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, at 4:33 PM, Rory McCann wrote:
> Have any of yous read the Ettiquette Guidelines¹? They're rubbish.
> 
> Frederik broke them by publically calling Mike Migurski out, and for 
> not assuming he was acting in good faith. *But* if anyone publishes 
> something saying “What Frederik did was wrong” (like I (& others) did), 
> then they are also breaking the Ettiquette Guidelines! That's a 
> horrible outcome!
> 
> ¹ https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette
> 
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, at 16:57, Maggie Cawley wrote:
> > I am so happy to see this thread. I believe it will take all of us 
> > coming together and speaking with a unified voice to bring upon the 
> > change we need at the global level. As Clifford mentioned, a few of us 
> > from the LCCWG met on Monday to start talking about next steps. It's 
> > not about one statement, but rather that discussions and comments like 
> > those from this past week affect us all as we work to build diverse 
> > communities around the world.   
> > 
> > Rob, Clifford and I discussed the need for a CoC, but when Rob pointed 
> > out the Etiquette Guidelines exist and are pretty widely accepted it 
> > seems like a logical place to start. It would also enable us to move a 
> > bit more quickly since the document exists and won't need many rounds 
> > of community feedback. What is missing is the process for moderation 
> > and a committee available to moderate any complaints on breaches of 
> > etiquette. It would be helpful to review and suggest edits to the 
> > existing guidelines during this process as well. For the US CoC it took 
> > about 8 months to finalize the CoC and moderation process, and find 
> > volunteers for a committee.
> > 
> > I look forward to growing the conversation. Thanks Heather for starting 
> > this thread here and to all of you who are stepping forward!
> > 
> > Maggie Cawley
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 21:30, arnalie faye vicario  
> > wrote:
> > > Hello/*Kumusta*,
> > > 
> > > *Salamat*/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking 
> > > this seriously.
> > > 
> > > It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual capacities, 
> > > but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison). 
> > > 
> > > This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About 
> > > Geospatial Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video).  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia 
> > > (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:
> > >> It is not just the maps that matters. Who *makes* the maps matters. Who 
> > >> *tells* the stories of the mapping matters, too. Who *LEADS* the mapping 
> > >> and storytelling also matters. Who *gets powerful* due to the mapping 
> > >> and storytelling matters most.
> > > 
> > > Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam 
> > > @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members 
> > > (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed 
> > > support and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is really 
> > > encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the document: 
> > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit
> > > 
> > > In case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM talk 
> > > mailing list: 
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.
> > > 
> > > Let us keep the fire burning!
> > > 
> > > =Arnalie
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow  
> > > wrote:
> > >> I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself, 
> > >> want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing 
> > >> etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best 
> > >> practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a sub committee under 
> > >> the LCCWG since CoC is critical to Local Chapters. We did a survey of 
> > >> Local Chapters and those considering forming one. The results showed 
> > >> that 5 LC already had a CoC, 6 did not and 6 were consider or in a 
> > >> discussion to have a CoC.
> > >> 
> > >> Clifford
> > >> 
> > >> On Tue, Dec 8, 

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Jmapb]

On 12/9/2020 2:34 PM, Maarten Deen wrote:

If you can not make an analogy then conversation and discussion is
lost and I do not see how this comment would degrade women.


Many in the world have the good fortune to live lives where the constant
threat of sexual assault is not an issue. To them, Trump's boasts may
seem offensive but also slightly absurd, and even weak.

Many others in the world are survivors of sexual violence. Many are
enduring it on a daily basis. To them, casual description of sexual
violence just to make a point -- even quoted, even as an analogy -- is
problematic.

Like you, I've personally seen no "systemic aggressive behaviour" in the
OSM community -- but I'll take seriously anyone who has.

Jason




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of conduct

[Jo Walsh]

Not sure how to make suggestions directly in the Google Doc or if i want to. 

I appreciate and feel broadly its sentiments but do not feel prepared to sign 
anything which has as a preamble an attack on one person, whatever the trigger. 
It's not equitable, risks entrenching the division. Principles sound but keep 
it about how things should be in a better world, not about how broken they are 
in this one.


zx
-- 
  Jo Walsh
  metaz...@fastmail.net

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, at 2:29 AM, arnalie faye vicario wrote:
> Hello/*Kumusta*,
> 
> *Salamat*/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking 
> this seriously.
> 
> It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual 
> capacities, but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison). 
> 
> This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About 
> Geospatial Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video).  
> 
> 
> Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia 
> (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:
> > It is not just the maps that matters. Who *makes* the maps matters. Who 
> > *tells* the stories of the mapping matters, too. Who *LEADS* the mapping 
> > and storytelling also matters. Who *gets powerful* due to the mapping and 
> > storytelling matters most.
> 
> Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam 
> @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members 
> (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed 
> support and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is 
> really encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the 
> document: 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit
> 
> In case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM 
> talk mailing list: 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.
> 
> Let us keep the fire burning!
> 
> =Arnalie
> 
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow  wrote:
> > I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself, 
> > want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing 
> > etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best 
> > practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a sub committee under the 
> > LCCWG since CoC is critical to Local Chapters. We did a survey of Local 
> > Chapters and those considering forming one. The results showed that 5 LC 
> > already had a CoC, 6 did not and 6 were consider or in a discussion to have 
> > a CoC.
> > 
> > Clifford
> > 
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:36 PM Heather Leson  wrote:
> >> Always
> >> Heather Leson
> >> heatherle...@gmail.com
> >> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson 
> >> Blog: textontechs.com
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:31 PM Clifford Snow  
> >> wrote:
> >>> Heather - A small group of the LCCWG met via BigBlueButton yesterday to 
> >>> start a similar initiative. I was going to send an invite to the rest of 
> >>> the LCCWG as well as to this mailing list. Since you have the ball 
> >>> rolling, can you include lo...@osmfoundation.org in the mailing.
> >>> 
> >>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:22 PM Heather Leson  
> >>> wrote:
>  Great. working in the draft now.  
>  
>  Thank you right back. Saturday is just a way to discuss this restart. We 
>  can keep building. 
>  
>  Heather 
>  
>  Heather Leson
>  heatherle...@gmail.com
>  Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson 
>  Blog: textontechs.com
>  
>  
>  On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:10 PM Gertrude Namitala  
>  wrote:
> > Thanks Heather for starting this. I will try to be available.
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > Trudy 
> > 
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, 23:05 Mikel Maron,  wrote:
> >> This is great
> >> 
> >> * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Tuesday, December 8, 2020, 03:55:49 PM EST, Heather Leson 
> >>  wrote: 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Great!   Editing now
> >> Hope we can have an initial chat
> >> 
> >> heather
> >> 
> >> Heather Leson
> >> heatherle...@gmail.com
> >> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson 
> >> Blog: textontechs.com
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 9:33 PM Rebecca Firth 
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Hi Heather,
> >> > 
> >> > Thanks for setting that up - I'll need to jig some things around but 
> >> > really hope to be able to join that meeting. Some people had already 
> >> > started working on a statement to share. I am sharing here for 
> >> > allies to add comments they would like to raise, and to identify 
> >> > people who are keen to move this work forward: 
> >> > 

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[mides.map]

  
  
Je continue donc ma réflexion pour
  savoir comment récupérer les refuges parmi toutes les données
  remontées mais la tache se complexifie un peu. On pourrait
  imaginer sélectionner uniquement ceux donc le tag name comporte
  "Refuge..." mais il y apparait d'autres cas de figures. 



Par exemple pour celui-ci,    https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4099043194 
  il est bien tagué tourism=alpine_hut et comporte le mot "Refuge"
  dans son tag name, seulement,  si l'on investigue un peu, on
  arrive à ça :
http://www.refuges.info/point/6168/batiment-en-montagne/Massif-Central/Refuge-de-Martinou/ 
  Peut être pas tout à fait un refuge d'altitude équipé. 



Apparemment sélection
  difficile/délicate pour avoir ces données. Si quelqu'un a une
  autre idée pour contourner le problème, je suis preneur.  





Le 09/12/2020 à 20:29, mides.map a
  écrit :


  
  Le problème est que l'on y trouve
aussi dans le tag = name : abris, auberge, baraque, bergerie,
cabane, foyer, gîte, grange, etc. assez difficile de faire la
part des choses pour ne récupérer que les entités pour
lesquelles ce tag alpine_hut est justifié. 
  
  
  
  Le 09/12/2020 à 19:37, Georges
Dutreix via Talk-fr a écrit :
  
  

Bonjour,
  
  Le premier au hasard s'appelle "Gîte d'étape". Ce serait donc
  plutôt tourism=hostel
  cf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Comment_cartographier_un...#G
  
  

Le 09/12/2020 à 18:50, Jacques
  Lavignotte a écrit :

Un
  refuge de montagne  dans l'Orne ? 
  
  J. 
  
  
  
  Le 09/12/2020 à 18:43, mides.map a écrit : 
  Bonsoir, 

pour un enrichissement de données géographiques, j'ai
récupéré dans la base les objets tagués  tourism=alpine_hut
sur tout le territoire. Pas de souci particulier à ce
niveau  dans la mesure où le nombre est assez restreint
(739). 

Seulement voila, si je m'en tiens à la définition d'osm
wiki, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:tourism%3Dalpine_hut
, il se trouve que quelques éléments sont tagués alors
qu'ils ne le devraient peut être pas :"Un refuge de montagne
est un bâtiment d'altitude isolé" 

Si quelqu’un passe par là, pourrait il me confirmer que je
suis dans une bonne logique ou pas. 

Voici quelques exemples, parmi tant d'autres. 

Bonne fin de journée. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1215114639

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2513644651

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3600508634

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657815447

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657817268

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657827768

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657834097

etc 

Michel 


___ 
Talk-fr mailing list 
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

  
  




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

  
  
  
  
  
  ___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




  


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[osm . sanspourriel]

En regardant les exemples : en virant en fonction de l'altitude ? De la
proximité d'une mairie ? De la zone ?

Je ne pense pas que des refuges se trouvent en landuse=residential, à
moins de 5 km de la mairie (?).

Et là l'opposé qu'ils soient proches d'une hauteur (natural=peak sauf
erreur).

Mais le mieux c'est de demander à ceux qui ont tagué comme ça si
tourism=hostel ne serait pas plus adapté.

Le 09/12/2020 à 20:29, mides.map - mides@gmail.com a écrit :

Le problème est que l'on y trouve aussi dans le tag = name : abris,
auberge, baraque, bergerie, cabane, foyer, gîte, grange, etc. assez
difficile de faire la part des choses pour ne récupérer que les
entités pour lesquelles ce tag alpine_hut est justifié.



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of conduct

[tilmanreinecke--- via Diversity-talk]

Maybe I my message will be a kick-off of messages of negative energy or it will end up in a fruitful discussion (for me and maybe others too) - I don't know.My question: Do we really need a Code Of Conduct saying us how we should respect each other?This sounds stupid to me. You did explain me that people actually need a CoC but I certainly cannot believe this. Is our world so full of darkness and so little of colour? I certainly cannot believe this.Maybe it's me - a stupid 20 years old boy seeing this different - not getting the point but maybe it's the othere who are stupid and needing a CoC in order to know how to cope with different people from different kind (not in a racist saying but in a saying of natural diversity of human). Diversity is human and we don't need a CoC when we can see individuals as individuals. Individuals are always in groups but that shouldn't prevent us from seeing them a individuals.E.g. I see each woman as an individual but also as an woman (being in the group women). Or even better I see each mapper as an individual but also as an mapper (being in the group mappers).Simple saying I see an individual as an individual but also take the group into consideration. An individual is in more than one group and in certain situations we need to take more than just one group into consideration.Seriously don't get me wrong: I am for diversity and I know what human can achieve with diversity. I only believe that a CoC in a way you think of (as a set of rules of good respectful behaviour). Instead I think we should try to convey the Yggdrasil view of the world. Let us get them to see users as individuals and at the same time let us get them to take the different groups (worlds) into consideration.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of conductFrom: Maggie Cawley To: diversity-talk CC: OSMF Local Chapters WG ,Gertrude Namitala ,Mikel Maron ,Rob Nickerson ,Community Working Group ,Miriam Mapanauta I am so happy to see this thread. I believe it will take all of us coming together and speaking with a unified voice to bring upon the change we need at the global level. As Clifford mentioned, a few of us from the LCCWG met on Monday to start talking about next steps. It's not about one statement, but rather that discussions and comments like those from this past week affect us all as we work to build diverse communities around the world.   Rob, Clifford and I discussed the need for a CoC, but when Rob pointed out the Etiquette Guidelines exist and are pretty widely accepted it seems like a logical place to start. It would also enable us to move a bit more quickly since the document exists and won't need many rounds of community feedback. What is missing is the process for moderation and a committee available to moderate any complaints on breaches of etiquette. It would be helpful to review and suggest edits to the existing guidelines during this process as well. For the US CoC it took about 8 months to finalize the CoC and moderation process, and find volunteers for a committee.I look forward to growing the conversation. Thanks Heather for starting this thread here and to all of you who are stepping forward!Maggie CawleyOn Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 21:30, arnalie faye vicario  wrote:Hello/Kumusta,Salamat/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking this seriously.It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual capacities, but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison). This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About Geospatial Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video). Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:It is not just the maps that matters.
Who makes the maps matters.
Who tells the stories of the mapping matters, too.
Who LEADS the mapping and storytelling also matters.
Who gets powerful due to the mapping and storytelling matters most.Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed support and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is really encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/editIn case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM talk mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.Let us keep the fire burning!=ArnalieOn Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow  wrote:I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself, want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a 

Re: [Talk-GB] Newbie damage alert in West Midlands

[Russ Garrett]

Ah I ran into his work this afternoon by pure chance and reverted one
of these changesets (95506246) and left a comment - no reply as yet.
It looked like vandalism to me.


Russ

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 19:51, Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> A new user, TL5100, is causing a bit of damage in the Midlands, deleting 
> loads of things for no obvious reason. A couple of their changesets have 
> comments to this effect already. Could someone have a word?
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TL5100/history#map=11/52.0822/-2.4818
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



-- 
Russ Garrett
r...@garrett.co.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Newbie damage alert in West Midlands

[Colin Smale]

A new user, TL5100, is causing a bit of damage in the Midlands, deleting
loads of things for no obvious reason. A couple of their changesets have
comments to this effect already. Could someone have a word? 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TL5100/history#map=11/52.0822/-2.4818___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Mateusz Konieczny via talk]

(1)
I am strongly opposed to quota system

"Board Seat allocation for OSMF members who are women and non-cis males,
and who are citizens of Low and Middle Income Countries"

(also, note that it is "citizens of", not actually poor people, also looking at 
Wikipedia
"this definition is not universally agreed upon. There is also no clear 
agreement on
which countries fit this category."
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Low_and_Middle_Income_Countries )

(2)
Also, while I am one of people who protested about comparing plagiarism to rape,
claiming that it was "dehumanizing message" is going too far in my opinion.

(3)
"Make Working Groups and OSM activities more equitable" is it also
code for "introduce quota system"?


Dec 9, 2020, 20:06 by cel...@gmail.com:

> Hello everybody
> I hope you are all well
>
> We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted to 
> the conversation in the osm-talk-list (> 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html> ) 
> considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced 
> for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to 
> diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
> That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable 
> mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve diversity.
>
> We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to sign 
> it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome): 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> On behalf of the signatories
> Best regards
>
> Céline Jacquin
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Maarten Deen]

I have been silent about this but when a document is drafted where only 
supporters will be heard, I have to speak out in Frederiks support.
I have seen no systemic aggressive behaviour that demotivates and 
excludes participation by women and minority groups in OSM or behaviour 
that degrades the spirit of open community culture, and damages the 
OpenStreetMap reputation from Frederik.


If you then feel that I am part of the problem, I am saddened and hurt 
by that because I do not feel myself that way. I have never been 
non-supportive of anyone in this community or any other.
I feel this is more a witchhunt than anything else. If you can not make 
an analogy then conversation and discussion is lost and I do not see how 
this comment would degrade women. It degrades the maker of the comment, 
i.e. Trump.


Regards,
Maarten

On 2020-12-09 20:06, Celine Jacquin wrote:

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have
reacted to the conversation in the osm-talk-list
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have
faced for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest
obstacles to diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real
change.That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the
desirable mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and
improve diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented
to sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing

On behalf of the signatories

Best regards

Céline Jacquin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[mides.map]

  
  
Le problème est que l'on y trouve aussi
  dans le tag = name : abris, auberge, baraque, bergerie, cabane,
  foyer, gîte, grange, etc. assez difficile de faire la part des
  choses pour ne récupérer que les entités pour lesquelles ce tag
  alpine_hut est justifié. 



Le 09/12/2020 à 19:37, Georges Dutreix
  via Talk-fr a écrit :


  
  Bonjour,

Le premier au hasard s'appelle "Gîte d'étape". Ce serait donc
plutôt tourism=hostel
cf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Comment_cartographier_un...#G


  
  Le 09/12/2020 à 18:50, Jacques
Lavignotte a écrit :
  
  Un
refuge de montagne  dans l'Orne ? 

J. 



Le 09/12/2020 à 18:43, mides.map a écrit : 
Bonsoir, 
  
  pour un enrichissement de données géographiques, j'ai récupéré
  dans la base les objets tagués  tourism=alpine_hut sur tout le
  territoire. Pas de souci particulier à ce niveau  dans la
  mesure où le nombre est assez restreint (739). 
  
  Seulement voila, si je m'en tiens à la définition d'osm wiki,
  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:tourism%3Dalpine_hut
  , il se trouve que quelques éléments sont tagués alors qu'ils
  ne le devraient peut être pas :"Un refuge de montagne est un
  bâtiment d'altitude isolé" 
  
  Si quelqu’un passe par là, pourrait il me confirmer que je
  suis dans une bonne logique ou pas. 
  
  Voici quelques exemples, parmi tant d'autres. 
  
  Bonne fin de journée. 
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1215114639
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2513644651
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3600508634
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657815447
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657817268
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657827768
  
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657834097
  
  etc 
  
  Michel 
  
  
  ___ 
  Talk-fr mailing list 
  Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org 
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
  


  
  
  
  
  ___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




  


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Celine Jacquin]

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted
to the conversation in the osm-talk-list (
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced
for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to
diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable
mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve
diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to
sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing


On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-de] Fwd: Flussrelationen: Mitglieder und deren Reihenfolge

[Franz-Peter Boley]

Moin,

ich hab mir im Rahmen des Schwerpunktes der Woche [0] mal die
Flussrelation der Ems [1] angeschaut und mir sind zwei Fragen gekommen:

Welche Segmente gehören in die Relation?

Es sind weite Teile des Dortmund-Ems-Kanals auch in der Relation samt
Schleusen. Diese Liniensegmente sind aber definitiv nicht natürlichen
Ursprungs und nicht Teil des Flusses Ems. Zumindest nach meinem
intuitiven Verständnis her dürften sie daher nicht Teil der Relation
sein oder gibt es gute Argumente es doch zu tun?
Ich würde den Dortmund-Ems-Kanal in eine eigene Relation packen. Das
sind für mich zwei unterschiedliche Wasserwege.

Ist eine Reihenfolge der Liniensegmente wichtig?
Nach meinem Verständnis nein.

Ist das in einer waterway-Relation relevant? Zumindest die "main_stream"
Segmente würde ich in eine Reihenfolge bringen, damit es ordentlich
aussieht.
Ich habe die main_stream Segmente in der Relation immer fortlaufend in
der Reihenfolge des Flusses eingeordnet, side_streams am Ende nach den
main_stream Segmenten. Dann sieht man im Relationseditor sofort, ob
main_stream Segmente in der Relation fehlen.

Aber Nebenströme? Würde ich möglichst an die Stelle in der Liste der
Segmente packen an der sich der Nebenstrom auch befindet. Oder gibt es
dazu Gegenargumente?
Bin mir nicht sicher, was Du unter Nebenströmen verstehst. In die
Relation kann man side_streams packen, das sind Nebenarme, die vom
main_stream abgehen und später wieder zurück in den main_stream münden.
Nebenflüsse (tributaries) nehme ich nicht in die Relation auf.

Das Wiki sagt dazu leider nichts, hat jemand Meinungen?

Viele Grüße
Hauke

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Schwerpunkt_der_Woche
[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/370068

Viele Grüße,
Franz-Peter
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-at] PLZ und Ortsvorwahlen von Österreich

[Philipp Kolmann via Talk-at]

Am 2020-12-07 12:51, schrieb grubernd:

Eine Datenlücke kann ich füllen: 2440 Moosbrunn .. Vorwahl 02234
Gleich wie Gramatneusiedl, also wären die beiden Gemeinden nach deiner
Logik zusammenzulegen.


So ich hab das jetzt auch noch berücksichtigt in meinem merger Script. 
Jetzt kann man mehrer Orte zu einer PLZ oder Vorwahl hinzufügen.


Bei der Vorwahl wird immer der Name des Wählamts hinterlegt, genauso bei 
der PLZ der original Name.


Dieses Mapping kann gerne noch erweitert werden. Ich weiss nicht, ob es 
dies schon wo als Datenbank gibt. Vielleicht hat wer eine Idee?


Bei mir in der Umgebung hab ich mal angefangen die Orte rundherum 
hinzuzumappen.


lg
Philipp

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Diversity-talk] [HOT Community WG] Re: Code of conduct

[Heather Leson]

Dear Diversity Mailing community and LCCWG  -  Thank you for these notes.

We are a collective who ask for your consideration and support:

*A Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behaviour in the OSM
Community. (1)*

Signatures and Translations are very welcome. Just let us know.

There will be an informal meeting on Saturday, December 12, 2020 at 1500
UTC (right before the AGM)

*Register to join please (2)
*

Thank you

On behalf of many signatories

*Footnotes:*
1. Sign our Statement about OSM Community

2. Join our informal diversity chat this saturday


On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:57 PM Maggie Cawley 
wrote:

> I am so happy to see this thread. I believe it will take all of us coming
> together and speaking with a unified voice to bring upon the change we need
> at the global level. As Clifford mentioned, a few of us from the LCCWG met
> on Monday to start talking about next steps. It's not about one statement,
> but rather that discussions and comments like those from this past week
> affect us all as we work to build diverse communities around the world.
>
> Rob, Clifford and I discussed the need for a CoC, but when Rob pointed out
> the Etiquette Guidelines exist and are pretty widely accepted it seems like
> a logical place to start. It would also enable us to move a bit more
> quickly since the document exists and won't need many rounds of community
> feedback. What is missing is the process for moderation and a committee
> available to moderate any complaints on breaches of etiquette. It would be
> helpful to review and suggest edits to the existing guidelines during this
> process as well. For the US CoC it took about 8 months to finalize the CoC
> and moderation process, and find volunteers for a committee.
>
> I look forward to growing the conversation. Thanks Heather for starting
> this thread here and to all of you who are stepping forward!
>
> Maggie Cawley
>
>
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 21:30, arnalie faye vicario 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello/*Kumusta*,
>>
>> *Salamat*/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking
>> this seriously.
>>
>> It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual capacities,
>> but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison).
>>
>> This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About
>> Geospatial Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video).
>> 
>>
>> Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia
>> (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:
>>
>>> It is not just the maps that matters. Who *makes* the maps matters. Who
>>> *tells* the stories of the mapping matters, too. Who *LEADS* the
>>> mapping and storytelling also matters. Who *gets powerful* due to the
>>> mapping and storytelling matters most.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam
>> @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members
>> (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed support
>> and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is really
>> encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the document:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit
>>
>> In case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM talk
>> mailing list:
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.
>>
>> Let us keep the fire burning!
>>
>> =Arnalie
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself,
>>> want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing
>>> etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best
>>> practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a sub committee under the
>>> LCCWG since CoC is critical to Local Chapters. We did a survey of Local
>>> Chapters and those considering forming one. The results showed that 5 LC
>>> already had a CoC, 6 did not and 6 were consider or in a discussion to have
>>> a CoC.
>>>
>>> Clifford
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:36 PM Heather Leson 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Always
 Heather Leson
 heatherle...@gmail.com
 Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
 Blog: textontechs.com


 On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:31 PM Clifford Snow 
 wrote:

> Heather - A small group of the LCCWG met via BigBlueButton yesterday
> to start a similar initiative. I was going to send an invite to the rest 
> of
> the LCCWG as well as to this mailing list. Since you 

Re: [Talk-se] Reverting undiscussed Lantmäteriet import

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/7/20 12:33, Johan wrote:
> If it would be possible to exclude this region
> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/935657) from the revert, that
> would be helpful. I will do QA on all the imported elements, refine,
> connect and reclassify as needed. If this request poses an unecessarily
> huge obstacle for the DWG effort to combat this import - please go ahead
> and revert it all.

No problem, I have identified these 125 changesets as lying wholly or
mostly in that region:

   94736549
   94736550
   94736555
   94737199
   94737297
   94737478
   94737607
   94737856
   94738026
   94738530
   94738786
   94738919
   94739012
   94739174
   94739219
   94739688
   94740035
   94740071
   94740241
   94740378
   94778106
   94778109
   94778112
   94778194
   94778197
   94778198
   94778515
   94778542
   94778602
   94778630
   94778659
   94778694
   94778852
   94778861
   94778878
   94778953
   94778981
   94779104
   94779174
   94779293
   94779495
   94779645
   94779742
   94779923
   94780019
   94780156
   94780224
   94780304
   94780567
   94780792
   94781175
   94781946
   94782119
   94782125
   94782148
   94782153
   94782224
   94782343
   94782350
   94782389
   94782399
   94782417
   94782446
   94782499
   94782537
   94782572
   94782589
   94782601
   94782621
   94782646
   94782669
   94782732
   94782756
   94782801
   94782880
   94782909
   94782952
   94782971
   94783012
   94783065
   94783126
   94783177
   94783238
   94783269
   94783323
   94783556
   94783624
   94783792
   94783875
   94784047
   94784079
   94784157
   94784213
   94784269
   94784445
   94784504
   94784568
   94784621
   94784746
   94784789
   94784801
   94784871
   94785022
   94785087
   94785274
   94785292
   94785312
   94785389
   94785392
   94785443
   94785469
   94785576
   94785605
   94785766
   94785793
   95187413
   95187421
   95188385
   95188392
   95256767
   95256927
   95256989
   95257308
   95257463

I will not revert those. A few other changests lie mostly outside the
area you indicated but do overlap with it; do you want me to keep these too?

94737856
94738530
94739219
94778198
95187413
94736897
94736890
94736893
94736895

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[Georges Dutreix via Talk-fr]

Bonjour,

Le premier au hasard s'appelle "Gîte d'étape". Ce serait donc plutôt 
tourism=hostel

cf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Comment_cartographier_un...#G



Le 09/12/2020 à 18:50, Jacques Lavignotte a écrit :

Un refuge de montagne  dans l'Orne ?

J.



Le 09/12/2020 à 18:43, mides.map a écrit :

Bonsoir,

pour un enrichissement de données géographiques, j'ai récupéré dans 
la base les objets tagués  tourism=alpine_hut sur tout le territoire. 
Pas de souci particulier à ce niveau  dans la mesure où le nombre est 
assez restreint (739).


Seulement voila, si je m'en tiens à la définition d'osm wiki, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:tourism%3Dalpine_hut , il 
se trouve que quelques éléments sont tagués alors qu'ils ne le 
devraient peut être pas :"Un refuge de montagne est un bâtiment 
d'altitude isolé"


Si quelqu’un passe par là, pourrait il me confirmer que je suis dans 
une bonne logique ou pas.


Voici quelques exemples, parmi tant d'autres.

Bonne fin de journée.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1215114639
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2513644651
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3600508634
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657815447
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657817268
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657827768
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657834097
etc

Michel


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Hereford area deletions by TL5100

[Steve Brook via Talk-gb-westmidlands]

New user TL5100 | OpenStreetMap 
has deleted a lot of stuff in Hereford, Ledbury and Worcester area. Can
someone check their work and revert if necessary

___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[Jacques Lavignotte]

Un refuge de montagne  dans l'Orne ?

J.



Le 09/12/2020 à 18:43, mides.map a écrit :

Bonsoir,

pour un enrichissement de données géographiques, j'ai récupéré dans la 
base les objets tagués  tourism=alpine_hut sur tout le territoire. Pas 
de souci particulier à ce niveau  dans la mesure où le nombre est assez 
restreint (739).


Seulement voila, si je m'en tiens à la définition d'osm wiki, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:tourism%3Dalpine_hut , il se 
trouve que quelques éléments sont tagués alors qu'ils ne le devraient 
peut être pas :"Un refuge de montagne est un bâtiment d'altitude isolé"


Si quelqu’un passe par là, pourrait il me confirmer que je suis dans une 
bonne logique ou pas.


Voici quelques exemples, parmi tant d'autres.

Bonne fin de journée.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1215114639
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2513644651
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3600508634
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657815447
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657817268
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657827768
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657834097
etc

Michel


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr


--
GnuPg : 156520BBC8F5B1E3 Because privacy matters.
« Quand est-ce qu'on mange ? » AD (c) (tm)

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Offrir une une carte des adresses à Theizé

[Brice]

Yves Kensicher, adjoint à Theizé vous souhaite de bonne fêtes de fin 
d'année.

Cf. ci-dessous son courriel, avec ma réponse.


 Message transféré 
Sujet : Re: Base adrese Theizé
Date : Wed, 9 Dec 2020 18:44:18 +0100
De : Brice 
Pour : Yves KENSICHER 

Bonjour,

Le 08/12/2020 à 10:48, Yves KENSICHER a écrit :

> Je tiens à vous remercier, ainsi que la communauté, pour vous être
> penchés sur
> ma question et trouver une solution. Je n'ai pas trop le temps sur cette
> période
> mais je profiterai des fêtes de fin d'année pour regarder en détail ce
> qui a été
> fait, corriger les erreurs et apprendre par la même occasion comment
> générer la carte.
> Il est probable que je vous recontacte à l'occasion pour éclaircir un ou
> deux points.

Avec plaisir, et il est bien possible que vous deveniez contributeur 
régulier sur OpenStreetMap (l'accoutumance est rapide pour les personnes 
intéressées par la géographie et leur territoire;-)

https://journals.openedition.org/netcom/2635#tocto3n6


> Dans l'attente, je vous souhaite de bonne fêtes de fin d'année et vous
> demande de transmettre ces voeux à la communauté.
> Bien cordialement
> Yves Kensicher, adjoint à Theizé

Je n'y manquerai pas, de très bonnes fêtes également.

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk-fr] Tag tourism=alpine_hut

[mides.map]

Bonsoir,

pour un enrichissement de données géographiques, j'ai récupéré dans la 
base les objets tagués  tourism=alpine_hut sur tout le territoire. Pas 
de souci particulier à ce niveau  dans la mesure où le nombre est assez 
restreint (739).


Seulement voila, si je m'en tiens à la définition d'osm wiki, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:tourism%3Dalpine_hut , il se 
trouve que quelques éléments sont tagués alors qu'ils ne le devraient 
peut être pas :"Un refuge de montagne est un bâtiment d'altitude isolé"


Si quelqu’un passe par là, pourrait il me confirmer que je suis dans une 
bonne logique ou pas.


Voici quelques exemples, parmi tant d'autres.

Bonne fin de journée.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1215114639
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2513644651
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3600508634
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657815447
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657817268
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657827768
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3657834097
etc

Michel


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-at] PLZ und Ortsvorwahlen von Österreich

[Philipp Kolmann via Talk-at]

Liebe Leute,

danke für die aufmunternden Worte. Hab erst mal die ersten Mails 
verdauen müssen.


Meine ursprüngliche Intention war einfach eine Eingrenzung der Vorwahlen 
auf Gebiete zu machen. Daher kommt auch die Ziffernweise Suche und dann 
der Zoom auf das Gebiet. Ich wollte einfach wissen, wie die Vorwahlen 
und dann die PLZ zusammenhängen.


Am 2020-12-08 11:32, schrieb andreas wecer:

Die Suche nach Ortsnamen sollte besser nicht case-sensitive sein. Um
einiges interessanter ist allerdings sowieso die umgekehrte Suche nach
PLZ/Vorwahl.


Ja wollte ich eh machen, hatte ich dann aus den Augen verloren. Ist aber 
jetzt behoben.



On 07.12.20 12:51, grubernd wrote:

 So wie du das implementiert hast ist das ja nur noch super.


Danke :-)



On 06.12.20 18:13, Kevin Kofler via Talk-at wrote:

   Wobei allerdings generell das Problem ist, daß viele Gemeinden in 
mehrere

   Postleitzahlen unterteilt sind, deren Grenzen in den Daten ganz
   grundsätzlich fehlen, z.B. (nur ein Beispiel von vielen):
   3400: Klosterneuburg
   3402: Klosterneuburg
   3404: Klosterneuburg
   3420: Kritzendorf
   3421: Höflein an der Donau
   die alle nur als Liste in der Gemeinde Klosterneuburg erscheinen und 
nicht

   räumlich abgetrennt.)


Da gibt es meiner Meinung nach 2 Möglichkeiten. Einmal sind es 
verschiedene Postämter (bzw deren Nachfolger) in einem Ort. Früher waren 
das wahrscheinlich auch die Startpunkte der Briefträger, was aber heute 
sicher nicht mehr überall übereinstimmt.


Es gibt natürlich viele zusammengelegte Orte, wo mehrere PLZ gültig sind 
für die jeweiligen Bereiche. Ich hab mir mangels Quelle auch aktuell 
nicht die Mühe gemacht, das dann weiter aufzuteilen sondern habe diese 
PLZ und Vorwahlen nur dem (mir sinnvollsten) nächsten Ort gemappt. Hier 
nehme ich gerne Patches an, wenn wer was im Detail näher weiss.


Wens interessiert. Ich hab 
https://github.com/pkolmann/austria-post-and-area-code/blob/main/data/mergeData.php 
über 1000 PLZ/Vorwahlen händisch auf Orte gemappt. Da ist sicher noch wo 
ein Wurm drin...



 Eine Datenlücke kann ich füllen: 2440 Moosbrunn .. Vorwahl 02234
Gleich wie Gramatneusiedl, also wären die beiden Gemeinden nach deiner 
Logik zusammenzulegen.


Aktuell habe ich nur jene Orte in meiner Liste, welche ich aus den 
Offiziellen Daten mappen konnte. Damit bleiben einige schwarze Löcher. 
Das ist mir klar.
Danke für den Input. Werd ich mal für eine nächste Version im Hinterkopf 
behalten.


Frage dürfen wir diese, zur Verbesserung und Ergänzung von PLZ 
Relationen in OpenStretMap verwenden.


Ja kann gerne verwendet werden. Ich habe die Daten auch mithilfe von OSM 
zusammengestellt.



Die Karte funktioniert sehr gut in den 8 Bundesländern, in denen die
Gemeinden kleiner sind als die Bezirke. Leider ist es in Wien 
andersrum, und
deshalb gibt es nur eine große Fläche für das ganze Bundesland (= 
Gemeinde)
mit einer langen Liste Postleitzahlen. Da wäre es sinnvoll, die 
Gemeinde in
Bezirke zu unterteilen. Die Wiener Stadtbezirke erscheinen ja nicht 
einmal

auf deiner "Bezirke"-Karte.


Danke für den Input. Hab ich jetzt auch behoben. Die Orte- und 
Bezirks-Karten hab ich von 
https://github.com/ginseng666/GeoJSON-TopoJSON-Austria und hier fehlten 
sie auch. Ich hab die jetzt mal bei mir nachgetragen. Leider 
überschneiden sich jetzt die Ortsvorwahl und die PLZen. Da ist mir noch 
nichts gscheites dazu eingefallen.



Ortsteile welche der Briefträger von einer anderen Gemeinde aus 
bedient, die lässt du bei Deiner Karte einfach aus.


Ich wüsste nicht, wo solche Daten öffentlich verfügbar sind

lg
Philipp

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Diversity-talk] Etiquette Guidelines bad | Re: Code of conduct

[Mikel Maron]

The etiquette guidelines have issues, but I’m not sure that’s one. If there was 
moderation and enforcement in place, than we wouldn’t need to call out 
publicly. Moderator could step in to do that. Prefer that way of handling it.

Mikel

On Wednesday, December 9, 2020, 11:33 AM, Rory McCann  
wrote:

Have any of yous read the Ettiquette Guidelines¹? They're rubbish.

Frederik broke them by publically calling Mike Migurski out, and for not 
assuming he was acting in good faith. *But* if anyone publishes something 
saying “What Frederik did was wrong” (like I (& others) did), then they are 
also breaking the Ettiquette Guidelines! That's a horrible outcome!

¹ https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, at 16:57, Maggie Cawley wrote:
> I am so happy to see this thread. I believe it will take all of us 
> coming together and speaking with a unified voice to bring upon the 
> change we need at the global level. As Clifford mentioned, a few of us 
> from the LCCWG met on Monday to start talking about next steps. It's 
> not about one statement, but rather that discussions and comments like 
> those from this past week affect us all as we work to build diverse 
> communities around the world.  
> 
> Rob, Clifford and I discussed the need for a CoC, but when Rob pointed 
> out the Etiquette Guidelines exist and are pretty widely accepted it 
> seems like a logical place to start. It would also enable us to move a 
> bit more quickly since the document exists and won't need many rounds 
> of community feedback. What is missing is the process for moderation 
> and a committee available to moderate any complaints on breaches of 
> etiquette. It would be helpful to review and suggest edits to the 
> existing guidelines during this process as well. For the US CoC it took 
> about 8 months to finalize the CoC and moderation process, and find 
> volunteers for a committee.
> 
> I look forward to growing the conversation. Thanks Heather for starting 
> this thread here and to all of you who are stepping forward!
> 
> Maggie Cawley
> 
> 
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 21:30, arnalie faye vicario  
> wrote:
> > Hello/*Kumusta*,
> > 
> > *Salamat*/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking this 
> > seriously.
> > 
> > It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual capacities, 
> > but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison). 
> > 
> > This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About Geospatial 
> > Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video).  
> > 
> > 
> > Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia 
> > (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:
> >> It is not just the maps that matters. Who *makes* the maps matters. Who 
> >> *tells* the stories of the mapping matters, too. Who *LEADS* the mapping 
> >> and storytelling also matters. Who *gets powerful* due to the mapping and 
> >> storytelling matters most.
> > 
> > Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam 
> > @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members 
> > (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed support 
> > and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is really 
> > encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the document: 
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit
> > 
> > In case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM talk 
> > mailing list: 
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.
> > 
> > Let us keep the fire burning!
> > 
> > =Arnalie
> > 
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow  
> > wrote:
> >> I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself, 
> >> want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing 
> >> etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best 
> >> practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a sub committee under the 
> >> LCCWG since CoC is critical to Local Chapters. We did a survey of Local 
> >> Chapters and those considering forming one. The results showed that 5 LC 
> >> already had a CoC, 6 did not and 6 were consider or in a discussion to 
> >> have a CoC.
> >> 
> >> Clifford
> >> 
> >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:36 PM Heather Leson  
> >> wrote:
> >>> Always
> >>> Heather Leson
> >>> heatherle...@gmail.com
> >>> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson 
> >>> Blog: textontechs.com
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:31 PM Clifford Snow  
> >>> wrote:
>  Heather - A small group of the LCCWG met via BigBlueButton yesterday to 
>  start a similar initiative. I was going to send an invite to the rest of 
>  the LCCWG as well as to this mailing list. Since you have the ball 
>  rolling, can you include lo...@osmfoundation.org in the mailing.
>  
>  On 

[Diversity-talk] Etiquette Guidelines bad | Re: Code of conduct

[Rory McCann]

Have any of yous read the Ettiquette Guidelines¹? They're rubbish.

Frederik broke them by publically calling Mike Migurski out, and for not 
assuming he was acting in good faith. *But* if anyone publishes something 
saying “What Frederik did was wrong” (like I (& others) did), then they are 
also breaking the Ettiquette Guidelines! That's a horrible outcome!

¹ https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, at 16:57, Maggie Cawley wrote:
> I am so happy to see this thread. I believe it will take all of us 
> coming together and speaking with a unified voice to bring upon the 
> change we need at the global level. As Clifford mentioned, a few of us 
> from the LCCWG met on Monday to start talking about next steps. It's 
> not about one statement, but rather that discussions and comments like 
> those from this past week affect us all as we work to build diverse 
> communities around the world.   
> 
> Rob, Clifford and I discussed the need for a CoC, but when Rob pointed 
> out the Etiquette Guidelines exist and are pretty widely accepted it 
> seems like a logical place to start. It would also enable us to move a 
> bit more quickly since the document exists and won't need many rounds 
> of community feedback. What is missing is the process for moderation 
> and a committee available to moderate any complaints on breaches of 
> etiquette. It would be helpful to review and suggest edits to the 
> existing guidelines during this process as well. For the US CoC it took 
> about 8 months to finalize the CoC and moderation process, and find 
> volunteers for a committee.
> 
> I look forward to growing the conversation. Thanks Heather for starting 
> this thread here and to all of you who are stepping forward!
> 
> Maggie Cawley
> 
> 
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 21:30, arnalie faye vicario  
> wrote:
> > Hello/*Kumusta*,
> > 
> > *Salamat*/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking this 
> > seriously.
> > 
> > It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual capacities, 
> > but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison). 
> > 
> > This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About Geospatial 
> > Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video).  
> > 
> > 
> > Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia 
> > (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:
> >> It is not just the maps that matters. Who *makes* the maps matters. Who 
> >> *tells* the stories of the mapping matters, too. Who *LEADS* the mapping 
> >> and storytelling also matters. Who *gets powerful* due to the mapping and 
> >> storytelling matters most.
> > 
> > Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam 
> > @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members 
> > (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed support 
> > and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is really 
> > encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the document: 
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit
> > 
> > In case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM talk 
> > mailing list: 
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.
> > 
> > Let us keep the fire burning!
> > 
> > =Arnalie
> > 
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow  
> > wrote:
> >> I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself, 
> >> want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing 
> >> etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best 
> >> practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a sub committee under the 
> >> LCCWG since CoC is critical to Local Chapters. We did a survey of Local 
> >> Chapters and those considering forming one. The results showed that 5 LC 
> >> already had a CoC, 6 did not and 6 were consider or in a discussion to 
> >> have a CoC.
> >> 
> >> Clifford
> >> 
> >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:36 PM Heather Leson  
> >> wrote:
> >>> Always
> >>> Heather Leson
> >>> heatherle...@gmail.com
> >>> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson 
> >>> Blog: textontechs.com
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:31 PM Clifford Snow  
> >>> wrote:
>  Heather - A small group of the LCCWG met via BigBlueButton yesterday to 
>  start a similar initiative. I was going to send an invite to the rest of 
>  the LCCWG as well as to this mailing list. Since you have the ball 
>  rolling, can you include lo...@osmfoundation.org in the mailing.
>  
>  On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:22 PM Heather Leson  
>  wrote:
> > Great. working in the draft now.  
> > 
> > Thank you right back. Saturday is just a way to discuss this restart. 
> > We can keep building. 
> > 
> > Heather 
> > 
> > Heather Leson
> > 

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[osm]

"På en 2 minus 1 vej er der kun ét spor for bilisterne".
https://www.vejdirektoratet.dk/pressemeddelelse/er-du-klar-til-moede-en-2-minus-1-vej
 


> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2020 at 5:10 PM
> From: "Jørgen Elgaard Larsen" 
> To: "OpenStreetMap Denmark" 
> Subject: Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej
>
> Det er et godt spørgsmål.
> 
> lanes=1 er ikke helt godt, for det betyder jo, at der kun er én bane. 
> Det vil de fleste nok tolke som om, at to modkørende biler ikke kan 
> passere hinanden.
> 
> Men 2-minus-1-veje er jo i virkeligheden tosporede veje med nogle sjove 
> markeringer, der angiver, at man skal køre midt på vejen, når der ikke 
> er andre i nærheden.
> 
> 
> - Jørgen
> 
> 
> o...@workmail.com skrev den 2020-12-09 13:40:
> > Forslag:
> >  
> > highway=residential
> > lanes=1
> > lanes:both_ways=1
> > cycleway=lane
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-dk mailing list
> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
>

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Jørgen Elgaard Larsen]

Det er et godt spørgsmål.

lanes=1 er ikke helt godt, for det betyder jo, at der kun er én bane. 
Det vil de fleste nok tolke som om, at to modkørende biler ikke kan 
passere hinanden.


Men 2-minus-1-veje er jo i virkeligheden tosporede veje med nogle sjove 
markeringer, der angiver, at man skal køre midt på vejen, når der ikke 
er andre i nærheden.



- Jørgen


o...@workmail.com skrev den 2020-12-09 13:40:

Forslag:
 
highway=residential
lanes=1
lanes:both_ways=1
cycleway=lane



___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of conduct

[Maggie Cawley]

I am so happy to see this thread. I believe it will take all of us coming
together and speaking with a unified voice to bring upon the change we need
at the global level. As Clifford mentioned, a few of us from the LCCWG met
on Monday to start talking about next steps. It's not about one statement,
but rather that discussions and comments like those from this past week
affect us all as we work to build diverse communities around the world.

Rob, Clifford and I discussed the need for a CoC, but when Rob pointed out
the Etiquette Guidelines exist and are pretty widely accepted it seems like
a logical place to start. It would also enable us to move a bit more
quickly since the document exists and won't need many rounds of community
feedback. What is missing is the process for moderation and a committee
available to moderate any complaints on breaches of etiquette. It would be
helpful to review and suggest edits to the existing guidelines during this
process as well. For the US CoC it took about 8 months to finalize the CoC
and moderation process, and find volunteers for a committee.

I look forward to growing the conversation. Thanks Heather for starting
this thread here and to all of you who are stepping forward!

Maggie Cawley


On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 21:30, arnalie faye vicario 
wrote:

> Hello/*Kumusta*,
>
> *Salamat*/Thanks everyone for continuing the conversations and taking
> this seriously.
>
> It is good to speak up and comment about it in our individual capacities,
> but a collective can build a fire  (charcoal comparison).
>
> This is what we did in OSM PH's Call to Correct Narratives About
> Geospatial Work in the Philippines (re: Amazon-HOT video).
> 
>
> Also, I would like to quote and highlight what David Garcia
> (@mapmakerdavid) has shared in Twitter:
>
>> It is not just the maps that matters. Who *makes* the maps matters. Who
>> *tells* the stories of the mapping matters, too. Who *LEADS* the mapping
>> and storytelling also matters. Who *gets powerful* due to the mapping
>> and storytelling matters most.
>>
>
> Thank you Geochicas, Celine @mapeadora, Heather, Rebecca, Miriam
> @mapanauta, Nelson Minar, LCCWG Group, OSMF past/present Board members
> (Kate, Rory and Mikel), HOT Community WG and everyone who expressed support
> and has spoken up (apologies if I missed your name). It is really
> encouraging and inspiring. Please add your thoughts in the document:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit
>
> In case you missed it (like me), here is what Celine sent in the OSM talk
> mailing list:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085727.html.
>
> Let us keep the fire burning!
>
> =Arnalie
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:54 AM Clifford Snow 
> wrote:
>
>> I should mention that what we, Maggie Crawely, Rob Nickerson and myself,
>> want to accomplish is to create a committee to moderate the existing
>> etiquette guidelines and later update the guidelines to reflect best
>> practices of Code of Conducts.We planned to form a sub committee under the
>> LCCWG since CoC is critical to Local Chapters. We did a survey of Local
>> Chapters and those considering forming one. The results showed that 5 LC
>> already had a CoC, 6 did not and 6 were consider or in a discussion to have
>> a CoC.
>>
>> Clifford
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:36 PM Heather Leson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Always
>>> Heather Leson
>>> heatherle...@gmail.com
>>> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
>>> Blog: textontechs.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:31 PM Clifford Snow 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Heather - A small group of the LCCWG met via BigBlueButton yesterday to
 start a similar initiative. I was going to send an invite to the rest of
 the LCCWG as well as to this mailing list. Since you have the ball rolling,
 can you include lo...@osmfoundation.org in the mailing.

 On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:22 PM Heather Leson 
 wrote:

> Great. working in the draft now.
>
> Thank you right back. Saturday is just a way to discuss this restart.
> We can keep building.
>
> Heather
>
> Heather Leson
> heatherle...@gmail.com
> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
> Blog: textontechs.com
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:10 PM Gertrude Namitala <
> trudyho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Heather for starting this. I will try to be available.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Trudy
>>
>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, 23:05 Mikel Maron,  wrote:
>>
>>> This is great
>>>
>>> * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, December 8, 2020, 03:55:49 PM EST, Heather Leson <
>>> heatherle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Great!   Editing now
>>> Hope we can have an initial chat
>>>

Re: [OSM-talk] Please review "Community attribution advice” wiki page

[Simon Poole]

Am 08.12.2020 um 18:36 schrieb Rory McCann:

Yes, fundamentally, you're 100% correct. The ODbL licence is the thing that 
matters when it comes to what's legally required. And that says nothing about 
“device independent pixels” or “javascript popup clicks”, it only refers to the 
mental state of someone.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on data protection 
(Art. 8) is only about 80 words long  (DE 73, EN 82, GA 101), but the GDPR that 
implements it is 55,000 words long. I view the ODbL as like our “constitution” 
for what you can do with the data.


This analogy is clearly wrong. If anything at all, the contributor terms 
would be the constitution, the ODbL is just one of many possible ways 
the constitutional requirements could be implemented, and, if you so 
want, the guidance published by the OSMF are the ordinances that cover 
details and fix issues that the law makers didn't foresee or which are 
simply mistakes.



It will be short, but for practical real word answers you need laws & court cases 
which expand on it. One can always challenge a law for violating a constituation limit 
or requirement, and it should be the same with the ODbL & the OSMF's Attribution 
Guidelines.


But outside of the realm of not really fitting analogies, there is a 
reason why in many modern states the constitution and laws evolve, 
because the world and the circumstances in which the rules are applied 
change over time, and wise governing bodies adapt their rule book to 
changing reality. The ODbL was formulated as a generic database licence, 
independent of the subject matter and without the more than a decade 
experience with actual use cases that we have now, many of which were 
not considered at the time.


We can take a pragmatic approach to this, which was the practice over 
the last 10 years and undoubtably one of the reasons OSM has become such 
a thriving success, we can formally revise the law (one of the LWG 
proposals for getting out of the quagmire in a democratic fashion that 
wasn't responded to), or we can tie ourselves to yesteryears fights with 
overly literal reading of the rules without taking change in to account.


Naturally people tend to only be literal when it serves their specific 
political aims and allow them to maximize hubris and strife, and not 
when not. Maybe I should just be literal about the contributor terms and 
bring OSM to a screeching halt for effect.


Simon



So I think there's a lot of benefit in writing out, in my more detail, how you 
can follow §4.3, rather than speaking in generalities.

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, at 00:08, Christoph Hormann wrote:



Rory McCann  hat am 07.12.2020 22:57 geschrieben:

But I think this attribution is too vague. It's advice seems to restate the 
relevant section from the ODbL. There are many examples of poor attribution 
where someone could argue that they meet this standard.

As i have already explained to you in

http://blog.imagico.de/the-osmf-changes-during-the-past-year-and-what-they-mean-for-the-coming-years-part-2/#comment-141145

the opposite is the case - the advise as formulated precisely explains
the criterion for valid attribution.

Attribution has the purpose to be perceived by humans.  To determine if
a certain form of attribution is acceptable you have to look at the
effect it has on human perception while interacting with the produced
work.

It is understandable that to people with a primarily technical
background this very concept appears uncomfortable and hard to grasp
and their reflex is to substitute this with something purely technical
where you can essentially program a test to verify if the attribution
is OK independent of the human user.  That cannot work.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [talk-cz] Mapy.cz - co používáme v CZ z OSM

[Tom Ka]

Díky moc za účast na SotM i aktualizaci informací, přeposílám do talk-cz (i
osm_sk). K budkám byla diskuze, čekáme až proběhne a pak se zřejmě pokusíme
získat od O2 nějaký seznam zrušených, jediná další varianta je asi
verifikace na místě.

Doufám že stejně jako nás, i vás práce s OSM aspoň trochu baví.
Tomáš Kašpárek (tom.k)

st 9. 12. 2020 v 13:02 odesílatel Zemlik, Pavel <
pavel.zem...@firma.seznam.cz> napsal:

> Dobrý den,
>
> jak jsem se včera domluvili, posílám přehled co nyní čerpáme  z dat OSM
> v rámci Česka:
>
>
>
> - heliporty
>
> - poštovní schránky (amenity=post_box)
>
> - popelnice na separovaný odpad
> (amenity=recycling+recycling_type=container)
>
> - SOS telefony (emergency=phone) – myslím, že drtivou většinu v Česku jsme
> doplnili my 
>
> - stojany pro kola (amenity=bicycle_parking)
>
> - automaty na jízdenky (vending=public_transport_tickets)
>
> - lavičky (amenity=bench)
>
> - knihobudky
>
> - parkovací automaty (vending=parking_tickets) – systematicky jsme
> doplnili po celé ČR
>
> - automat na dálniční poplatky, mýtné (vending=toll)
>
> - telefonní budky (amenity=telephone) – zde se chystá velké rušení, budete
> na to nějak systémově reagovat?
>
>
> https://www.lidovky.cz/byznys/firmy-a-trhy/operator-o2-na-konci-roku-zrusi-vetsinu-telefonnich-budek-budou-jen-v-malych-obcich.A191010_101821_firmy-trhy_ele
>
> podle hlášení našich uživatelů už budky jednotlivě na OSM rušíme, ale
> chtělo by to komplexní přístup
>
>
>
> Pro hledání ještě stahujeme řeky a potoky, tzn. detail objektů je z OSM (a
> Wikipedie). A chystáme se i na komunikace II. a III. třídy.
>
> Např.:
> https://mapy.cz/zakladni?x=15.0161212=50.4879982=13=osm=1017301351
>
>
>
> Protože je pro nás důležité propojení se články Wikipedie, prošli jsme
> všechny CS články o řekách a potocích a jejich WikidataID jsme doplnili
> k jejich OSM objektům.
>
> A kde chyběly, tam jsme vytvářeli i relace, aby byl nejen náš import
> kvalitnější.
>
> Abychom přinesli co nejvíce českých textů našim uživatelům i v zahraničí,
> doplnili jsme vazbu na české články např. i pro hory na Slovensku,
> v Rakousku i jinde.
>
> Wikidata ID doplňujeme např. i v Chorvatsku k obcím.
>
> Obecně se vazbě OSM-WikidataID věnujeme celosvětově a doplnili jsme
> takových objektů tisíce.
>
> Mj. i z důvodu projektu https://mapy.cz/atlas, kde až na výjimky všechny
> objekty primárně pochází z OSM (současně je to samozřejmě na Mapy.cz).
>
>
>
> Co se týče našeho organizovaného doplňování do OSM, projekt jsme uvedli
> dle pravidel zde:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/Mapycz
>
> Kromě zde uvedených lidí, kteří denně řeší frontu hlášení od uživatelů,
> ale občas významněji (i když nárazově) přispíváme ještě další 3 lidé (Jan
> Fukátko, já a brigádník Vojta Zabořil).
>
> Editací máme opravdu hodně, je to nekonečná práce 
>
>
>
> Ať se daří!
>
>
>
> *Pavel Žemlík*
>
> Manažer kartografické redakce senior
>
>
>
> tel: +420 234 694 355
>
> gsm:  +420 777 301 509
>
>
>
> pavel.zem...@firma.seznam.cz
>
> https://www.seznam.cz/
>
>
>
> Seznam.cz, a.s., Radlická 3294/10, 150 00 Praha 5
> 
>
>
>
>
> Je dobré vědět, že tento e-mail a přílohy jsou důvěrné. Pokud spolu
> jednáme o uzavření obchodu, vyhrazujeme si právo naše jednání kdykoli
> ukončit. Pro fanoušky právní mluvy - vylučujeme tím ustanovení občanského
> zákoníku o předsmluvní odpovědnosti. Pravidla o tom, kdo u nás a jak
> vystupuje za společnost a kdo může co a jak podepsat naleznete zde
> 
> You should know that this e-mail and its attachments are confidential. If
> we are negotiating on the conclusion of a transaction, we reserve the right
> to terminate the negotiations at any time. For fans of legalese—we hereby
> exclude the provisions of the Civil Code on pre-contractual liability. The
> rules about who and how may act for the company and what are the signing
> procedures can be found here
> .
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[talk-cz] SotM CZ+SK 2020 - prezentace

[Tom Ka]

Zdravim,

na web https://openstreetmap.cz/sotm/2020 byly doplneny prezentace k
prednaskam. Videa snad doda vop take brzy.

Diky tom.k

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Mapbox-GL JS version 2: vers la fin de l'Opensource sur les tuiles vectorielles

[Yves P.]

Il y en a déjà 4 !
https://mobile.twitter.com/stevage1/status/1336631752287113216

__
Yves
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[osm]

Forslag:
 
highway=residential
lanes=1
lanes:both_ways=1
cycleway=lane
 
 

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2020 at 1:00 PM
From: "Finn Hansen via Talk-dk" 
To: "'OpenStreetMap Denmark'" 
Cc: "Finn Hansen" 
Subject: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

På Fyn ser jeg et væld af 2 minus 1 veje skyde op som paddehatte, men her har 
jeg et problem. Er der nogen der ved hvordan man tagger dem?
 
Lytter1
___ Talk-dk mailing list 
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
 
 

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

[Stefan Tauner via Talk-at]

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 21:51:19 +0100
Günther Zinsberger  wrote:

> Ich hatte da noch die Hoffnung, dass evtl. Mapillary über die Ferne hier 
> helfen könnte, was leider hier nicht zutreffend ist: bei der Abzweigung 
> von der Hauptstraße gibt es weder ein Sackgassenzeichen noch ein 
> Verbotsschild (klar, da kommen noch die Zufahrten der Häuser dazwischen).

Bei der Einfahrt davor, die zu einer gleichwertigen Gruppe von Häusern
und dazugehörigen Parkplätzen/Garagen führt, ist eine Einfahrt-Verboten-
Schild vorhanden:
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/hx5OT2CXyPcrglOO_WHebw

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

[Stefan Tauner via Talk-at]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 12:37:23 +0100
grubernd  wrote:

> Ich interpretiere die Note mit "kein Übergang möglich" als sprachlich 
> schlampig, weil gemeint ist wohl "kein Übergang erlaubt".
> 
> Die Brücke dürfte nach meiner Interpretation der Luftbilder circa 3 
> Meter weiter westlich liegen als aktuell eingezeichnet. Hellgraues Holz, 
> wahrscheinlich kein Geländer, dazu fehlt der Schatten.

Das ist eine "Stromschnelle". Auf den ViennaGIS-Bildern sieht man das
nicht so klar - würde ich dort auch nicht als Brücke oder sonstigen
Übergang interpretieren - aber auf den ESRI-Bildern sind das ziemlich
eindeutig nur ein paar Steine und man erkennt auch, das am Ende der
Straße ein durchgehender(?) Zaun steht. Die ESRI-Bilder scheinen auch
von ViennaGIS zu stammen aber aus Juni 2019. Keine Ahnung, wieso der
direkte ViennaGIS Layer so verpixelt ist (es sind aber grundsätzlich
andere Bilder). Jedenfalls: Ich spende 100 eur an die OSMF, wenn dort
aktuell eine für unbestifelte Fußgänger trocken überwindbare Brücke
ist. :P

> Aber deswegen aus der Ferne irgendwelche Zugangsberechtigungen zu setzen 
> würde ich auch nicht auf Grund einer Note machen. Und finde ich auch 
> grundsätzlich unpassend.

Das ist hier auch nicht nur auf Grund einer Note passiert.

> Leider verstehen viele von den Pacmen, wie sie fkv so schön bezeichnet 
> hat, das Prinzip hinter OSM Daten nicht:
> 
> Was eingetragen ist, war zum Zeitpunkt des Eintrags die überprüfte 
> Realität. Alles was nicht eingetragen ist, ist nicht eingetragen. Nicht 
> mehr und nicht weniger.

Diese Ansicht ist mehr als naiv. Du schließt von deinen Mapping-
Prinzipien darauf, dass sich andere auch entsprechend verhalten und nur
verifiziert so existierende Objekte aufgenommen wurden. Der Fall hier
ist eines von vielen Beispielen, das dies widerlegt. Und das liegt mit
nichten nur an den PacMen oder Armchair-Mappern. Manchmal erinnern sich
Leute auch einfach falsch an manche Details, andere tragen bewußt
falsche Dinge ein oder schätzen vor Ort Dinge falsch ein. Passiert.
Damit müssen wir leben und die Daten nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen
verbessern.

Meine Conclusio deshalb (und nicht nur im OSM-Umfeld anwendbar): Alles
hinterfragen egal ob (nicht)anonyme Note, Vormapper oder andere Quellen
und daraus versuchen, eine eindeutige Wahrheit zu (re)konstruieren.
Wenn das nicht möglich ist, vor Ort klären (lassen) und nichts
eintragen, was nicht zumindest sehr plausibel und nicht widerlegbar ist.

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

[talk-ph] Update/Write-up: Co-Creating a Code of Conduct for OpenStreetMap Philippines (Part 1/n)

[arnalie faye vicario]

Hi everyone,

Apologies for the late update/write up, I didn't have a laptop for weeks
but thankfully, I have now.

I wrote an OSM diary for the summary, what happened during the Pista ng
Mapa session and proposed next steps:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/arnalielsewhere/diary/395052

Thanks to everyone who participated! Draft CoC on the way!

Hopefully before the year ends; if not, then early apologies.

Thanks and happy holidays in advance!
=Arnalie
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Mapbox-GL JS version 2: vers la fin de l'Opensource sur les tuiles vectorielles

[Yves P.]

>
> Tu te trompes : rien n'empêche de faire un fork depuis une version pre
> 2.0.0.
>

Yuri en a fait un
https://github.com/openmaptiles/openmaptiles/issues/1052#issuecomment-741556712

Et aussi OpenMapTiles
https://github.com/openmaptiles/openmaptiles/issues/1052#issuecomment-741703557

__
Yves
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

[Finn Hansen via Talk-dk]

På Fyn ser jeg et væld af 2 minus 1 veje skyde op som paddehatte, men her
har jeg et problem. Er der nogen der ved hvordan man tagger dem?

 

Lytter1

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

[grubernd]

On 08.12.20 19:38, Stefan Tauner via Talk-at wrote:

In dem Fall deutet die Note ja sogar darauf hin, dass da überhaupt
keine Brücke ist. Ich kann Armchair-mappenderweise auch keine erkennen,
aber das heißt natürlich nix. Die Straße die dorthin führt, dürfte
aber tatsächlich auf Privatgrund sein. D.h. vermutlich sind die Daten
jetzt leicht besser geworden.


Ich interpretiere die Note mit "kein Übergang möglich" als sprachlich 
schlampig, weil gemeint ist wohl "kein Übergang erlaubt".


Die Brücke dürfte nach meiner Interpretation der Luftbilder circa 3 
Meter weiter westlich liegen als aktuell eingezeichnet. Hellgraues Holz, 
wahrscheinlich kein Geländer, dazu fehlt der Schatten.



Aber deswegen aus der Ferne irgendwelche Zugangsberechtigungen zu setzen 
würde ich auch nicht auf Grund einer Note machen. Und finde ich auch 
grundsätzlich unpassend.


Leider verstehen viele von den Pacmen, wie sie fkv so schön bezeichnet 
hat, das Prinzip hinter OSM Daten nicht:


Was eingetragen ist, war zum Zeitpunkt des Eintrags die überprüfte 
Realität. Alles was nicht eingetragen ist, ist nicht eingetragen. Nicht 
mehr und nicht weniger.



Ich hätte zB als Armchair-Mapper keinen Stress die Brücke - ohne Weg, 
weil nicht sichtbar - aus dem Luftbild einzutragen und als Source eben 
"aerial image" anzugeben. Aber irgendein idiotischer Validator würde das 
wieder als "unconnected" bemängeln und dann kommt der nächste Pacman und 
löscht das einfach so.


grüsse,
grubernd

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk] Your experience in reaching out to Maps.me users ?

[Andreas Vilén]

Also, what exactly is "to the right" in this context? North, East, South or
West?

/Andreas

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 3:04 AM Mario Frasca  wrote:

> My experience is limited to one person in Panamá, who's used two user
> names: Kielito and Kielito1.
>
> He adds shops, one per changeset, he shortens names, and seldom uses
> capital letters.
>
> https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8527833
>
> https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8943003
>
> As you can see, he only replied to
> https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/61198755, where I asked him where
> some object really belonged, given I would not expect a shop to be in
> the middle of a road.  "put it to the right, thank you" was the answer.
> something I did not do.  I have no idea why he thinks he can't edit once
> he's contributed data.
>
> At a certain point I started systematically commenting to his changesets
> "who do you think is going to clean up your incomplete information?",
> before I alerted the DWG about it.  The reply I received from the DWG
> was that I should not scare away providers of valuable information.  I
> can't find the reply, to correctly quote text and attribute authorship
> of the reply.
>
> regards, MF
>
>
> On 04/12/2020 11:37, michael.montani95 at gmail.com (Michael Montani)
> wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I'm calling back a discussion on this mailing list on how Maps.Me edits
> > most of the times result to be very bad and close to vandalism.
> Furthermore
> > it seems the editor hasn't any notification system (as iD and JOSM) to
> tell
> > the user that at least someone sent an OSM message.
> >
> > We found out some users mapping very bad (and huge quantity) of POIs here
> > and there in:
> > - DRC: An user mapping over all the country, including sensible,
> temporary
> > data like an assault place in Irumu
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8018353585#map=19/1.45249/29.87712
> > (mapped as shop=butcher, with questionable dark sarcasm), plus many other
> > questionable ones
> >
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/format%20answer/history#map=10/1.2949/29.9117
> > - Mali: An user putting thousands of office=government in Bamako and
> other
> > cities, making impossible to produce decent urban maps out of OSM data
> > within a capital city...
> >
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/seydoukone/history#map=11/12.6172/-7.9153
> >
> > What worries me the most is that no one of these users are answering to
> > messages (and it's very common among Maps.Me users as I see...) and even
> if
> > they could be reverted, nothing is letting them know that they are
> actually
> > vandalising the map. It's difficult also to proceed with full reverts
> > because some tags from time to time seem reasonable, but can be
> challenging
> > to verify on the ground.
> >
> > I'm actually wondering about the causes of such bad tags, is Maps.Me
> using
> > preset names which are difficult to associate to actual tags? Should it
> be
> > mandatory for OSM editors to show OSM notifications? It seems also
> Maps.Me
> > itself is difficult to contact!!
> https://github.com/mapsme/omim/issues/13951
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Michael Montani
> > -- next part --
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20201204/f34c603e/attachment.htm
> >
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Advanced warning: temporary shutdown of OpenTrailView and Hikar, weekend of Dec 19/20

[Nick Whitelegg via talk]

Hello everyone,

For those of you who might use https://opentrailview.org or https://hikar.org, 
or the Hikar app, I'm posting an advanced warning that these sites will be 
unavailable on the weekend of December 19/20.

This is because I am updating the underlying database of Europe OSM data, which 
I have not updated in more than a year now.

Thanks,
Nick


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk