[OSM-talk] Fwd: Re: User deleting many roads in Brazil
I tried but many conflicts appeared in JOSM I'm not experienced to do it. Please if someone can do it. It's not only this 3 changeset but most of that user. >>Saturday, October 24, 2020 10:57 AM -05:00 from Erick de Oliveira Leal < >>erickdeoliveiral...@gmail.com >: >> >>Good morning, a user in Brasil is deleting many roads, I think all of its >>changeset need to be reverted. >>Examples of bad changesets: >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92345676 >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/ 92703956 >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/ 92610958 >>___ >>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] Hands Off !, respect my (our) space
In ID, on your profile page is, Other nearby users, and the home location, map the point is other locals based on my (our) edits know where we (I) live, but come on don’t edit the building i (we) live in !___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] Hands Off !, respect my (our) space
In ID, on your profile page is, Other nearby users, and the home location, map the point is other locals based on my (our) edits know where we (I) live, but come on don’t edit the building i (we) live in !___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [Tagging] [Talk-transit] [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)
ever time this person answers, no one else will talk because he is addressing it to me and not the grope. i have never id him as he has me, what about the rules ? Forwarded message From: Clay Smalley < claysmal...@gmail.com > To: 80hnhtv4a...@bk.ru, Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topics < talk-tran...@openstreetmap.org > Cc: t...@openstreetmap.org, tagg...@openstreetmap.org, OSM Talk US < talk-us@openstreetmap.org > Date: Saturday, August 22, 2020 2:33 PM -05:00 Subject: Re: [Tagging] [Talk-transit] [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !) Everyone knows who you're talking about at this point, and nobody cares. Use the remaining day or so of your temporary ban to work on some hobbies outside of OpenStreetMap. And be careful about who you say isn't local. I'm moving to Northern Indiana next week and I'll certainly get the chance to survey many of the estimated stop positions I remotely mapped. I hope to see you around as we continue working on the same things. On Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 12:21 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-transit < talk-tran...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>it was one person in CA adding 400 unverified tags to rail service in chicago. >> >>one just 818 m, away from my home. >> >>>SATURDAY, August 22, 2020 12:32 PM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >>> >>>sent from a phone >>> >>>> On 22. Aug 2020, at 10:15, pangoSE < pang...@riseup.net > wrote: >>>> >>>> Here is yet another example of bad data in our database: >>>fix it ;-) >>> >>>Of course OpenStreetMap contains errors, just like any other source, and >>>probably more, given that most contributors are laymen and have very few >>>experience (few total edits, often just 1). >>> >>>On the other hand, we may be very fast when something changes, very flexible >>>in emergencies (think Haiti), and have interesting niche data that >>>commercial and public data providers don’t care for. >>> >>>It all depends on the local community in the end. If you have reached a >>>critical mass to have locals everywhere, it will work great and bugs will >>>wash out. Otherwise the data might get stale just like any other data. Also >>>using the data is essential to find the problems, for example the 212 story >>>garage is likely fixed now ;-) >>> >>>I tend to agree with Steve A. >>> >>>Cheers Martin >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> > > > > ___ >Talk-transit mailing list >talk-tran...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Tagging mailing list tagg...@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)
>it was one person in CA adding 400 unverified tags to rail service in chicago. > >one just 818 m, away from my home. > >>Saturday, August 22, 2020 12:32 PM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >> >>sent from a phone >> >>> On 22. Aug 2020, at 10:15, pangoSE < pang...@riseup.net > wrote: >>> >>> Here is yet another example of bad data in our database: >>fix it ;-) >> >>Of course OpenStreetMap contains errors, just like any other source, and >>probably more, given that most contributors are laymen and have very few >>experience (few total edits, often just 1). >> >>On the other hand, we may be very fast when something changes, very flexible >>in emergencies (think Haiti), and have interesting niche data that commercial >>and public data providers don’t care for. >> >>It all depends on the local community in the end. If you have reached a >>critical mass to have locals everywhere, it will work great and bugs will >>wash out. Otherwise the data might get stale just like any other data. Also >>using the data is essential to find the problems, for example the 212 story >>garage is likely fixed now ;-) >> >>I tend to agree with Steve A. >> >>Cheers Martin >>___ >>talk mailing list >>t...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-transit] [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)
>it was one person in CA adding 400 unverified tags to rail service in chicago. > >one just 818 m, away from my home. > >>Saturday, August 22, 2020 12:32 PM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >> >>sent from a phone >> >>> On 22. Aug 2020, at 10:15, pangoSE < pang...@riseup.net > wrote: >>> >>> Here is yet another example of bad data in our database: >>fix it ;-) >> >>Of course OpenStreetMap contains errors, just like any other source, and >>probably more, given that most contributors are laymen and have very few >>experience (few total edits, often just 1). >> >>On the other hand, we may be very fast when something changes, very flexible >>in emergencies (think Haiti), and have interesting niche data that commercial >>and public data providers don’t care for. >> >>It all depends on the local community in the end. If you have reached a >>critical mass to have locals everywhere, it will work great and bugs will >>wash out. Otherwise the data might get stale just like any other data. Also >>using the data is essential to find the problems, for example the 212 story >>garage is likely fixed now ;-) >> >>I tend to agree with Steve A. >> >>Cheers Martin >>___ >>talk mailing list >>t...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)
>it was one person in CA adding 400 unverified tags to rail service in chicago. > >one just 818 m, away from my home. > >>Saturday, August 22, 2020 12:32 PM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >> >>sent from a phone >> >>> On 22. Aug 2020, at 10:15, pangoSE < pang...@riseup.net > wrote: >>> >>> Here is yet another example of bad data in our database: >>fix it ;-) >> >>Of course OpenStreetMap contains errors, just like any other source, and >>probably more, given that most contributors are laymen and have very few >>experience (few total edits, often just 1). >> >>On the other hand, we may be very fast when something changes, very flexible >>in emergencies (think Haiti), and have interesting niche data that commercial >>and public data providers don’t care for. >> >>It all depends on the local community in the end. If you have reached a >>critical mass to have locals everywhere, it will work great and bugs will >>wash out. Otherwise the data might get stale just like any other data. Also >>using the data is essential to find the problems, for example the 212 story >>garage is likely fixed now ;-) >> >>I tend to agree with Steve A. >> >>Cheers Martin >>___ >>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] VANDALISM !
FYI; https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism Purposeful removal or degradation of data that are known to be correct, Deliberate adding incorrect data; People who revert other people's work should expect to be able to demonstrate that the reversion was well reasoned and proportionate to the issue. Not There; Unverified if someone puts in 400 + unverified tags in one edit, If someone reverts, 400 + edits, in one edit, done on good faith by others over the years to conform to there way of thinking, If someone deletes, 400 + edits, in one edit, done on good faith by others over the years to conform to there way of thinking, If someone refuses to let others, edit because they have taken over that type edit, all bus stops in the same area, all train stations in the same area, all boundaries in the same area. Edits that do not conform to the subject wiki. if someone downloads data that will create one mulitipolygon, against all wikis Also there is no wiki on unverified edits. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !
FYI; https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism Purposeful removal or degradation of data that are known to be correct, Deliberate adding incorrect data; People who revert other people's work should expect to be able to demonstrate that the reversion was well reasoned and proportionate to the issue. Not There; Unverified if someone puts in 400 + unverified tags in one edit, If someone reverts, 400 + edits, in one edit, done on good faith by others over the years to conform to there way of thinking, If someone deletes, 400 + edits, in one edit, done on good faith by others over the years to conform to there way of thinking, If someone refuses to let others, edit because they have taken over that type edit, all bus stops in the same area, all train stations in the same area, all boundaries in the same area. Edits that do not conform to the subject wiki. if someone downloads data that will create one mulitipolygon, against all wikis Also there is no wiki on unverified edits. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] changeset: 89516909
i was told i could not use do to licence GIS to. >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:38 PM -05:00 from Brian M. Sperlongano >: > >All, > >I fixed this boundary relation and also one neighboring town (Wheeling, IL) >using the Cook County, Illinois GIS as the data source, and re-used all of the >original boundary relations. Unfortunately it appears that all of Cook County >needs to be updated to reflect the county GIS data (found here: >https://hub-cookcountyil.opendata.arcgis.com/pages/boundary-open-data ). >Those census polygons are fairly close, but different. The two border towns I >checked just north in Lake County appear to line up perfectly with the Cook >County data so this might just be a Cook County issue. This is a start but >there's lots of work to do there. > >On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 9:10 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>lines no relations yes >> >> >>>Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:52 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson < >>>miketh...@gmail.com >: >>> >>> >>>On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. >>>> >>>>and it is not a polygon, >>>As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in >>>other words, they have to close. >>> >>>>and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >>>The boundary relation ( 126598 ) is currently broken. for one thing, it >>>doesn't close at the location of Williamsberg Square residential area. >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> ___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
i was told i could not use do to licence GIS to. >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:38 PM -05:00 from Brian M. Sperlongano >: > >All, > >I fixed this boundary relation and also one neighboring town (Wheeling, IL) >using the Cook County, Illinois GIS as the data source, and re-used all of the >original boundary relations. Unfortunately it appears that all of Cook County >needs to be updated to reflect the county GIS data (found here: >https://hub-cookcountyil.opendata.arcgis.com/pages/boundary-open-data ). >Those census polygons are fairly close, but different. The two border towns I >checked just north in Lake County appear to line up perfectly with the Cook >County data so this might just be a Cook County issue. This is a start but >there's lots of work to do there. > >On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 9:10 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>lines no relations yes >> >> >>>Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:52 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson < >>>miketh...@gmail.com >: >>> >>> >>>On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. >>>> >>>>and it is not a polygon, >>>As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in >>>other words, they have to close. >>> >>>>and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >>>The boundary relation ( 126598 ) is currently broken. for one thing, it >>>doesn't close at the location of Williamsberg Square residential area. >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> ___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >___ >Talk-us mailing list >talk...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
>Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:23 PM -05:00 from John D. : > >i was told i could not use non OSM licenses. > > >>Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:19 PM -05:00 from "Wayne Emerson, Jr. via talk" < >>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >> >>Cook County GIS most likely has the most authoritative dataset. You can >>download it here: >>https://hub-cookcountyil.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/534226c6b1034985aca1e14a2eb234af_2?geometry=-88.214%2C42.072%2C-87.560%2C42.161 >> >> >>On 8/18/2020 8 :51 PM, Mike Thompson wrote: >>> >>>On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. >>>> >>>>and it is not a polygon, >>>As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in >>>other words, they have to close. >>> >>>>and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >>>The boundary relation ( 126598 ) is currently broken. for one thing, it >>>doesn't close at the location of Williamsberg Square residential area. >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >> >> >>Virus-free. www.avast.com >>___ >>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] [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
lines no relations yes >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:52 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. >> >>and it is not a polygon, >As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in other >words, they have to close. > >>and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >The boundary relation ( 126598 ) is currently broken. for one thing, it >doesn't close at the location of Williamsberg Square residential area. >___ >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: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] changeset: 89516909
lines no relations yes >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:52 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. >> >>and it is not a polygon, >As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in other >words, they have to close. > >>and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >The boundary relation ( 126598 ) is currently broken. for one thing, it >doesn't close at the location of Williamsberg Square residential area. >___ >talk mailing list >t...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. and it is not a polygon, and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:36 PM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar >: > >I'm going to bow out of this discussion. The boundary relation is >broken again. I'm not trying to be confrontational, but my attempts to >figure out what sources this user is using and to reconcile this with >what they are editing appear to be antagonizing them. I have also lost >my patience so I will probably not be the most understanding anymore. > >James > >On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 20:23 -0400, Kevin Kenny wrote: >> You still aren't giving us very much to go on. There's obviously >> some boundary that you consider to be inarguably correct. You need >> either to enter the data yourself or tell us where to find it and >> where the discrepancies are. >> >> Sometimes that involves quite a lot of research. I have a ton of data >> conflicts about boundaries near me, and only rarely do I have the >> time to pursue the issues. If often involves reconciling half a dozen >> supposedly authoritative sources, as shown in >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ke9tv/diary/391486 . It's very >> rarely as simple as 'agency X is wrong and agency Y is right'. It's >> often 'agency X has lines that reflect current annexation, but part >> of their boundary is in NAD27 and part WGS84. Agency Y misses a >> recent annexation but has got the datums right. Agency Z has the >> artificial lines right, but is totally off base with the shorelines. >> Agency W appears to have digitized from a small-scale map and has a >> ton of quantization error.' >> >> It's not a political boundary, but >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ke9tv/diary/42951 shows another >> example of the level of cadastral research that's often required to >> sort these things out. >> >> By the way, I _do_ occasionally go out into the field and try to >> recover old survey marks to sort these things out. For the >> inconsistent corner between Lost Clove Unit and Big Indian Wilderness >> at https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/attachments/20191205/osm-vs-nysgis.png I >> simply gave up. There are cairns at both corners. If the professional >> surveyors couldn't close the line, what hope do I have? (Nobody >> actually cares. It's wilderness anyway.) >> >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 8:03 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >> talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> > FYI; >> > >> > for all of you who are not in country and do not understand about >> > usa city bounders. >> > >> > https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/contact.html >> > >> > and did you read what the other guy said, this is the census data >> > not true map data. >> > >> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89598349 . >> > >> > > Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:52 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar < >> > > jumba...@gmail.com >: >> > > >> > > What link are you using for this? I downloaded the places >> > > boundary >> > > information from here: >> > > https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php >> > > >> > > As I said, I'm happy to change, but I can't change without actual >> > > information. >> > > >> > > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 18:43 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us >> > > wrote: >> > > > i am looking at the TIRGER web, show’s the real map online and >> > > > nothing you did matches. >> > > > >> > > > i live here and a block away from the edens spur just saying. >> > > > >> > > > > Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:38 AM -05:00 from James >> > > Umbanhowar < >> > > > > jumba...@gmail.com >: >> > > > > >> > > > > It would probably be best if these suggestions were added in >> > > the >> > > > > changeset comments, as they don't need to be discussed on the >> > > > > mailing >> > > > > list. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 11:36 -0400, James Umbanhowar wrote: >> > > > > > I'm the person who made the changes and am happy to adjust >> > > the >> > > > > map to >> > > > > > better authoritative data or information. My motivation for >> > > this >> > > > > was >> > > > > &g
Re: [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth. and it is not a polygon, and i broke nothing i fixed what the other guy broke and did it all by hand. >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:36 PM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar >: > >I'm going to bow out of this discussion. The boundary relation is >broken again. I'm not trying to be confrontational, but my attempts to >figure out what sources this user is using and to reconcile this with >what they are editing appear to be antagonizing them. I have also lost >my patience so I will probably not be the most understanding anymore. > >James > >On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 20:23 -0400, Kevin Kenny wrote: >> You still aren't giving us very much to go on. There's obviously >> some boundary that you consider to be inarguably correct. You need >> either to enter the data yourself or tell us where to find it and >> where the discrepancies are. >> >> Sometimes that involves quite a lot of research. I have a ton of data >> conflicts about boundaries near me, and only rarely do I have the >> time to pursue the issues. If often involves reconciling half a dozen >> supposedly authoritative sources, as shown in >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ke9tv/diary/391486 . It's very >> rarely as simple as 'agency X is wrong and agency Y is right'. It's >> often 'agency X has lines that reflect current annexation, but part >> of their boundary is in NAD27 and part WGS84. Agency Y misses a >> recent annexation but has got the datums right. Agency Z has the >> artificial lines right, but is totally off base with the shorelines. >> Agency W appears to have digitized from a small-scale map and has a >> ton of quantization error.' >> >> It's not a political boundary, but >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ke9tv/diary/42951 shows another >> example of the level of cadastral research that's often required to >> sort these things out. >> >> By the way, I _do_ occasionally go out into the field and try to >> recover old survey marks to sort these things out. For the >> inconsistent corner between Lost Clove Unit and Big Indian Wilderness >> at https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/attachments/20191205/osm-vs-nysgis.png I >> simply gave up. There are cairns at both corners. If the professional >> surveyors couldn't close the line, what hope do I have? (Nobody >> actually cares. It's wilderness anyway.) >> >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 8:03 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >> talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> > FYI; >> > >> > for all of you who are not in country and do not understand about >> > usa city bounders. >> > >> > https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/contact.html >> > >> > and did you read what the other guy said, this is the census data >> > not true map data. >> > >> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89598349 . >> > >> > > Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:52 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar < >> > > jumba...@gmail.com >: >> > > >> > > What link are you using for this? I downloaded the places >> > > boundary >> > > information from here: >> > > https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php >> > > >> > > As I said, I'm happy to change, but I can't change without actual >> > > information. >> > > >> > > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 18:43 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us >> > > wrote: >> > > > i am looking at the TIRGER web, show’s the real map online and >> > > > nothing you did matches. >> > > > >> > > > i live here and a block away from the edens spur just saying. >> > > > >> > > > > Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:38 AM -05:00 from James >> > > Umbanhowar < >> > > > > jumba...@gmail.com >: >> > > > > >> > > > > It would probably be best if these suggestions were added in >> > > the >> > > > > changeset comments, as they don't need to be discussed on the >> > > > > mailing >> > > > > list. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 11:36 -0400, James Umbanhowar wrote: >> > > > > > I'm the person who made the changes and am happy to adjust >> > > the >> > > > > map to >> > > > > > better authoritative data or information. My motivation for >> > > this >> > > > > was >> > > > > &g
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
FYI; for all of you who are not in country and do not understand about usa city bounders. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/contact.html and did you read what the other guy said, this is the census data not true map data. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89598349 . >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:52 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar < >jumba...@gmail.com >: > >What link are you using for this? I downloaded the places boundary >information from here: >https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php > >As I said, I'm happy to change, but I can't change without actual >information. > >On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 18:43 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote: >> i am looking at the TIRGER web, show’s the real map online and >> nothing you did matches. >> >> i live here and a block away from the edens spur just saying. >> >> > Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:38 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar < >> > jumba...@gmail.com >: >> > >> > It would probably be best if these suggestions were added in the >> > changeset comments, as they don't need to be discussed on the >> > mailing >> > list. >> > >> > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 11:36 -0400, James Umbanhowar wrote: >> > > I'm the person who made the changes and am happy to adjust the >> > map to >> > > better authoritative data or information. My motivation for this >> > was >> > > to fix a mangled boundary relation that didn't have consistent >> > outer >> > > and inner members. The changes came in two changesets, >> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89220282 and >> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89516909 >> > > >> > > The first changeset just made the relation consistent with outer >> > ways >> > > and inner ways. I preserved all the ways that were in the >> > relation >> > > that >> > > lead to the inconsistency and they are still in the database with >> > a >> > > note attached to them. The second came after a changeset comment >> > that >> > > noted that the fixed relation didn't match and earlier unbroken >> > > relation, in particular around the Edens Spur. I then changed the >> > > border in this area to match the 2019 Tiger data in that area >> > only. >> > > >> > > James >> > > >> > > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 02:37 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us >> > wrote: >> > > > Changeset #89220282 >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Monday, August 17, 2020 6:34 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson < >> > > > > miketh...@gmail.com >: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:24 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >> > > > > talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> > > > > > tiger is up to date on the web map using the current data i >> > > > > > just >> > > > > > think he picked the wrong year, >> > > > > >> > > > > That relation was first created in 2009. According to the >> > source >> > > > > tag, it used 2008 Tiger data, so the original mapper probably >> > > > > used >> > > > > the best available TIGER data at the time. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > also all he got was a white line in his first try. >> > > > > > Way: 813726663 >> > > > > >> > > > > That way needs to be added to the relation, and the relation >> > must >> > > > > close. >> > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
FYI; for all of you who are not in country and do not understand about usa city bounders. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/contact.html and did you read what the other guy said, this is the census data not true map data. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89598349 . >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:52 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar < >jumba...@gmail.com >: > >What link are you using for this? I downloaded the places boundary >information from here: >https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php > >As I said, I'm happy to change, but I can't change without actual >information. > >On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 18:43 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote: >> i am looking at the TIRGER web, show’s the real map online and >> nothing you did matches. >> >> i live here and a block away from the edens spur just saying. >> >> > Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:38 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar < >> > jumba...@gmail.com >: >> > >> > It would probably be best if these suggestions were added in the >> > changeset comments, as they don't need to be discussed on the >> > mailing >> > list. >> > >> > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 11:36 -0400, James Umbanhowar wrote: >> > > I'm the person who made the changes and am happy to adjust the >> > map to >> > > better authoritative data or information. My motivation for this >> > was >> > > to fix a mangled boundary relation that didn't have consistent >> > outer >> > > and inner members. The changes came in two changesets, >> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89220282 and >> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89516909 >> > > >> > > The first changeset just made the relation consistent with outer >> > ways >> > > and inner ways. I preserved all the ways that were in the >> > relation >> > > that >> > > lead to the inconsistency and they are still in the database with >> > a >> > > note attached to them. The second came after a changeset comment >> > that >> > > noted that the fixed relation didn't match and earlier unbroken >> > > relation, in particular around the Edens Spur. I then changed the >> > > border in this area to match the 2019 Tiger data in that area >> > only. >> > > >> > > James >> > > >> > > On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 02:37 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us >> > wrote: >> > > > Changeset #89220282 >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Monday, August 17, 2020 6:34 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson < >> > > > > miketh...@gmail.com >: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:24 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >> > > > > talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> > > > > > tiger is up to date on the web map using the current data i >> > > > > > just >> > > > > > think he picked the wrong year, >> > > > > >> > > > > That relation was first created in 2009. According to the >> > source >> > > > > tag, it used 2008 Tiger data, so the original mapper probably >> > > > > used >> > > > > the best available TIGER data at the time. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > also all he got was a white line in his first try. >> > > > > > Way: 813726663 >> > > > > >> > > > > That way needs to be added to the relation, and the relation >> > must >> > > > > close. >> > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
i am looking at the TIRGER web, show’s the real map online and nothing you did matches. i live here and a block away from the edens spur just saying. >Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:38 AM -05:00 from James Umbanhowar >: > >It would probably be best if these suggestions were added in the >changeset comments, as they don't need to be discussed on the mailing >list. > >On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 11:36 -0400, James Umbanhowar wrote: >> I'm the person who made the changes and am happy to adjust the map to >> better authoritative data or information. My motivation for this was >> to fix a mangled boundary relation that didn't have consistent outer >> and inner members. The changes came in two changesets, >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89220282 and >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89516909 >> >> The first changeset just made the relation consistent with outer ways >> and inner ways. I preserved all the ways that were in the relation >> that >> lead to the inconsistency and they are still in the database with a >> note attached to them. The second came after a changeset comment that >> noted that the fixed relation didn't match and earlier unbroken >> relation, in particular around the Edens Spur. I then changed the >> border in this area to match the 2019 Tiger data in that area only. >> >> James >> >> On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 02:37 +0300, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote: >> > Changeset #89220282 >> > >> > >> > > Monday, August 17, 2020 6:34 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson < >> > > miketh...@gmail.com >: >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:24 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >> > > talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> > > > tiger is up to date on the web map using the current data i >> > > > just >> > > > think he picked the wrong year, >> > > >> > > That relation was first created in 2009. According to the source >> > > tag, it used 2008 Tiger data, so the original mapper probably >> > > used >> > > the best available TIGER data at the time. >> > > >> > > > >> > > > also all he got was a white line in his first try. >> > > > Way: 813726663 >> > > >> > > That way needs to be added to the relation, and the relation must >> > > close. >> > > ___ >> > > Talk-us mailing list >> > > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ___ >> > Talk-us mailing list >> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
Changeset #89220282 >Monday, August 17, 2020 6:34 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:24 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>tiger is up to date on the web map using the current data i just think he >>picked the wrong year, >That relation was first created in 2009. According to the source tag, it used >2008 Tiger data, so the original mapper probably used the best available TIGER >data at the time. > >> >>also all he got was a white line in his first try. >>Way: 813726663 >That way needs to be added to the relation, and the relation must close. >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
tiger is up to date on the web map using the current data i just think he picked the wrong year, also all he got was a white line in his first try. Way: 813726663 Changeset # 89220282 >Monday, August 17, 2020 6:16 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > >1) Best not to delete and start over as the history will be lost. >2) Do you have an accurate source that has a license that is compatible with >OSM? Could you share a link to it? >3) General observation is that there is a lot of territory that is not >enclosed by any admin level 8 boundary, which in a built up area like this, >seems unusual to me. > >Mike >On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:04 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>this is not the current boundary, could be more than 10 years + old, >> >>can’t the whole relation, #126598, northbrook, be deleted and then put back >>in. >> >>i tried by hand but this is to much to trace. >> >>>Monday, August 17, 2020 4:43 PM -05:00 from Paul Johnson < >>>ba...@ursamundi.org >: >>> >>>On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 4:02 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>can somebody who knows how to use Tiger data fix this ? >>> >>>Fix what?? >>>___ >>>Talk-us mailing list >>>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> >> >> >> ___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
this is not the current boundary, could be more than 10 years + old, can’t the whole relation, #126598, northbrook, be deleted and then put back in. i tried by hand but this is to much to trace. >Monday, August 17, 2020 4:43 PM -05:00 from Paul Johnson : > >On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 4:02 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>can somebody who knows how to use Tiger data fix this ? > >Fix what?? >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] changeset: 89516909
can somebody who knows how to use Tiger data fix this ? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] Tag:railway=stop
Did someone on this List, contribute to this Wiki.? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dstop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] Tag:railway=stop
Did someone on this List, contribute to this Wiki.? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dstop ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-transit] Tag:railway=stop
Did someone on this List, contribute to this Wiki.? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dstop ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [OSM-talk] Planned revert of added surface and tracktype tags without local knowledge in various countries
in the united states the hole thing starts out as gravel , >Saturday, July 18, 2020 3:44 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 2:23 PM Mark Wagner < mark+...@carnildo.com > wrote: > >>* Two adjacent sections of track being tagged as "grade 2" and "grade >> 4" not because of any difference in road surface, but because one has >> a line of grass between the ruts and the other doesn't. >In rural areas where I have spent time people often only put gravel where the >wheels contract the ground, and leave the middle part of the road/track as is >(which is often grass/short native vegetation). This is done to save money. >The result is that from overhead imagery, it may appear not to be gravel, and >thus may be incorrectly tagged at a lower tracktype. >___ >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: [Talk-transit] Bus routes in Málaga: Should we add "stop_area" relations?
the Tag:railway=stop, has some of the same issues. >Saturday, July 18, 2020 12:27 PM -05:00 from Jarek Piórkowski >: > >On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 13:17, Daniel Capilla < dcapil...@gmail.com > wrote: >> When we started mapping the bus routes in Málaga, Alan Grant and I came >> to the conclusion that it was not necessary to add "stop_area" relations >> due to the type of bus stops in Málaga, [2] where there are no actual >> stop areas (only a stop position in the own road and a pole on the >> sidewalk usually). >> >> Is that solution correct? Should we add "stop_area" relations at every >> bus stop position? I would have to create a lot of additional relations, >> only with the stop position and the platform features. I am not sure if >> that would be reasonable/useful for any purpose. What do you think? >> >> [2] >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES_talk:Rutas_de_bus_en_M%C3%A1laga#Uso_de_la_relaci.C3.B3n_.22stop_area.22 >> (in Spanish) >stop_area does not seem necessary for support in many popular OSM >transit data consumers (OsmAnd and öpnvkarte/openbusmap come to mind). >You probably don't have to add them unless something is really unclear >without it. In particular it doesn't seem very necessary for simple >cases like 2 stops on either side of the road. (It won't hurt, but >it's not necessary.) > >Reading through (autotranslated) wiki discussion, it does make some >sense that stop_area is more useful in areas where a number of >physical halt points share one ref ID. If that's not the case for you, >probably don't need to bother. > >--Jarek > >___ >Talk-transit mailing list >Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] bus stop name
i think it is the same tag format that only will show on the standard map the street name because no one puts the the route no on the name line and that is the only thing the non editor see’s not like the transit map where there is a route line. the point is there is no pop up on the standard map so how do you know what the route no. it is ? >Friday, July 17, 2020 5:02 AM -05:00 from Sander Deryckere >: > >Hi, > > editor does not show the route number > >Since you specifically mention the editor, perhaps it's worth to check out >JOSM as an editor. iD is just a generic editor and fine for most tasks, but >JOSM can be extended with plugins and styles that make it easy to work on >specific features (like bus routes). > >Kind regards, >Sander >Op vr 17 jul. 2020 11:40 schreef Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-transit < >talk-transit@openstreetmap.org >: >> >> >> >>Jul 17, 2020, 03:15 by talk-transit@openstreetmap.org : >>> In the USA bus stops (flag stops) are located for the most part at named >>>intersections, that is at where the street >>> >>>sign is. >>> >>> so you DO know where you are. but on the OSM standard map the bus stop >>>tag depending on the >>> >>>editor does not show the route number, can you have the route number on the >>>tag ? >>> >>>the wiki on this seems to be written for a European standard. >>> >>> >>> >>You can change layer of map (cake / paper sheets button on the right) >>and select >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/47.60203/-122.32333=T >>or >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/47.60203/-122.32333=O >>both showing bus lines. ___ >>Talk-transit mailing list >>Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit >___ >Talk-transit mailing list >Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[Talk-transit] bus stop name
In the USA bus stops (flag stops) are located for the most part at named intersections, that is at where the street sign is. so you DO know where you are. but on the OSM standard map the bus stop tag depending on the editor does not show the route number, can you have the route number on the tag ? the wiki on this seems to be written for a European standard. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[OSM-talk] private or not, USA ?
Are wi-fi passwords and the IP number of a hot spot, located in MC Donald, burger-king, Starbucks, motel 6, super 8, best western ect. public ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] private or not, USA ?
Are wi-fi passwords and the IP number of a hot spot, located in MC Donald, burger-king, Starbucks, motel 6, super 8, best western ect. public ? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Old phone line or old power line?
if you want more information, you have to give more information. >Saturday, June 27, 2020 2:23 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 12:21 PM Bryan Housel < bhou...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> I’d tag as `abandoned:power=minor_line` since you said it is down in places. >> >> >> It is impossible to tell from the picture what its original purpose was, but >> this doesn’t matter much if you just want to get it mapped. >Thanks Brian, I will proceed along those lines. I would still be interested to >hear from experts in the utility field as to what the original purpose of the >lines were. Since this is in the US, one case assume standard household >voltage (given the size of the insulators and the fact that it terminiantes at >an old house in ruins), which back in the day was 110. In which case, there >would be a considerably percentage voltage drop over the many km distnace this >line spans. > >Mike >___ >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: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] fake, edit, fake map.
>How old is the satellite view, do we even know, or are we making a fake map >here. > >what about fact checking ? >>Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:58 PM -05:00 from James < james2...@gmail.com >: >> >>as have I, I don't live it Africa, made edits there, I certainly don't live >>in North Korea, made edits there, I don't live in Florida, made edits there. >>What's your point being 100miles away? Some of these places I have visited, >>some I haven't >>On Tue., Jun. 16, 2020, 1:54 p.m. Hauke Stieler, < m...@hauke-stieler.de > >>wrote: >>>I made edits from 2000km away from where I live. But I was there on >>>vacation. It's possible that these editors were there, even if they >>>aren't locals ;) >>> >>>Just be happy about good edits in your region and talk to them if you >>>have something to discuss. >>> >>>Hauke >>> >>>On 16.06.20 19:24, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>> i am trying to make a point here about editors that are 100 of miles away. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:20 PM -05:00 from Clay Smalley >>>> < claysmal...@gmail.com >: >>>> >>>> Not sure what it is you're trying to point out here. Have you >>>> started a conversation with the person who made that edit? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:11 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us >>>> < talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>> > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Added a service road. >>>> >>>> Edited about hours ago by >>>> >>>> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >>>> >>>> >>>> https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Talk-us mailing list >>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>> >>>> >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Talk-us mailing list >>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> talk mailing list >>>> t...@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>>> >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>___ >>talk mailing list >>t...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] fake, edit, fake map.
>How old is the satellite view, do we even know, or are we making a fake map >here. > >what about fact checking ? >>Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:58 PM -05:00 from James < james2...@gmail.com >: >> >>as have I, I don't live it Africa, made edits there, I certainly don't live >>in North Korea, made edits there, I don't live in Florida, made edits there. >>What's your point being 100miles away? Some of these places I have visited, >>some I haven't >>On Tue., Jun. 16, 2020, 1:54 p.m. Hauke Stieler, < m...@hauke-stieler.de > >>wrote: >>>I made edits from 2000km away from where I live. But I was there on >>>vacation. It's possible that these editors were there, even if they >>>aren't locals ;) >>> >>>Just be happy about good edits in your region and talk to them if you >>>have something to discuss. >>> >>>Hauke >>> >>>On 16.06.20 19:24, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>> i am trying to make a point here about editors that are 100 of miles away. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:20 PM -05:00 from Clay Smalley >>>> < claysmal...@gmail.com >: >>>> >>>> Not sure what it is you're trying to point out here. Have you >>>> started a conversation with the person who made that edit? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:11 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us >>>> < talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>> > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Added a service road. >>>> >>>> Edited about hours ago by >>>> >>>> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >>>> >>>> >>>> https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Talk-us mailing list >>>> talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>> >>>> >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Talk-us mailing list >>>> talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> talk mailing list >>>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>>> >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>___ >>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] [Talk-us] fake, edit, FAKE map.
ok ! >Tuesday, June 16, 2020 1:14 PM -05:00 from Clay Smalley >: > >To be clear, you mean that everyone is mapping incorrectly if they are not >local? That's an absurd premise—lots of mappers do valuable remote work >without having to be on the ground and see what they're mapping in person. Of >course, disputes arise between local mappers and remote mappers, and it's best >to follow the judgment of local mappers in such situations. But it's a stretch >to say that remote mappers are always wrong. > >Complaining to the mailing list won't make anything better. You have the power >to fix this yourself. What's holding you back? >On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:20 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>I meant everbody is if they are not local. >> >> >>>Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:17 PM -05:00 from Maarten Deen < md...@xs4all.nl >: >>> >>>On 2020-06-16 18:09, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>> Added a service road. >>>> >>>> Edited about hours ago by >>>> >>>> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >>>> >>>> https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >>>If you think it is fake, you first comment on the changeset and ask the >>>mapper to explain. Or look at his profile and see if you can get more >>>information about the mapper. >>>If you think the mapper is continuously mapping incorrectly you can >>>address the OSMF. But than you need to be able to show some kind of >>>dialog with the mapper in question and show that he is repeatedly and >>>purpousfully mapping incorrectly. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Maarten >> >> >> >> ___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >___ >Talk-us mailing list >talk...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] fake, edit, FAKE map.
ok ! >Tuesday, June 16, 2020 1:14 PM -05:00 from Clay Smalley >: > >To be clear, you mean that everyone is mapping incorrectly if they are not >local? That's an absurd premise—lots of mappers do valuable remote work >without having to be on the ground and see what they're mapping in person. Of >course, disputes arise between local mappers and remote mappers, and it's best >to follow the judgment of local mappers in such situations. But it's a stretch >to say that remote mappers are always wrong. > >Complaining to the mailing list won't make anything better. You have the power >to fix this yourself. What's holding you back? >On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:20 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>I meant everbody is if they are not local. >> >> >>>Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:17 PM -05:00 from Maarten Deen < md...@xs4all.nl >: >>> >>>On 2020-06-16 18:09, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>> Added a service road. >>>> >>>> Edited about hours ago by >>>> >>>> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >>>> >>>> https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >>>If you think it is fake, you first comment on the changeset and ask the >>>mapper to explain. Or look at his profile and see if you can get more >>>information about the mapper. >>>If you think the mapper is continuously mapping incorrectly you can >>>address the OSMF. But than you need to be able to show some kind of >>>dialog with the mapper in question and show that he is repeatedly and >>>purpousfully mapping incorrectly. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Maarten >> >> >> >> ___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] fake, edit, fake map.
i am trying to make a point here about editors that are 100 of miles away. >Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:20 PM -05:00 from Clay Smalley >: > >Not sure what it is you're trying to point out here. Have you started a >conversation with the person who made that edit? >On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:11 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>Added a service road. >>Edited about hours ago by >>Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >> >>https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >> >> >> >> ___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >___ >Talk-us mailing list >talk...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] fake, edit, FAKE map.
I meant everbody is if they are not local. >Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:17 PM -05:00 from Maarten Deen : > >On 2020-06-16 18:09, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >> Added a service road. >> >> Edited about hours ago by >> >> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >> >> https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >If you think it is fake, you first comment on the changeset and ask the >mapper to explain. Or look at his profile and see if you can get more >information about the mapper. >If you think the mapper is continuously mapping incorrectly you can >address the OSMF. But than you need to be able to show some kind of >dialog with the mapper in question and show that he is repeatedly and >purpousfully mapping incorrectly. > >Regards, >Maarten ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] fake, edit, FAKE map.
I meant everbody is if they are not local. >Tuesday, June 16, 2020 12:17 PM -05:00 from Maarten Deen : > >On 2020-06-16 18:09, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >> Added a service road. >> >> Edited about hours ago by >> >> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 >> >> https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm >If you think it is fake, you first comment on the changeset and ask the >mapper to explain. Or look at his profile and see if you can get more >information about the mapper. >If you think the mapper is continuously mapping incorrectly you can >address the OSMF. But than you need to be able to show some kind of >dialog with the mapper in question and show that he is repeatedly and >purpousfully mapping incorrectly. > >Regards, >Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] fake, edit, FAKE map.
Added a service road. Edited about hours ago by Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] fake, edit, FAKE map.
Added a service road. Edited about hours ago by Version #1 · Changeset #86698283 https://imgur.com/gallery/k6Zjnqm ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] river - stream
ok ! >Saturday, June 13, 2020 5:19 PM -05:00 from John D. : > >OK ! > > >>Saturday, June 13, 2020 4:24 PM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >> >>Though if valid tagging results in poor results, then it still can be reported >>https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD (check whatever it is already reported >>before making a new issue) >> >>Jun 6, 2020, 12:28 by talk@openstreetmap.org: >>>>then why is the picture on top of the bridge when bridge is added. >>> >>>You appear to be confusing the ID editor with actual renderings of the map. >>>How it appears i iD when in edit mode is irrelevant. We map & tag so >>>renderers can produce detailed maps. >>> >>> >>> >>>On 06/06/2020 01:57, John D. wrote: >>>>tunnel looks better than bridge, water is still visible under the layer of >>>>bridge, or area, does not hide water. >>>> >>>>tunnel hides water. >>>> >>>>>Friday, June 5, 2020 8:43 AM -05:00 from Dave F via talk >>>>> : >>>>> >>>>>On 05/06/2020 13:45, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> when the river stream comes to the bridge can you split and add tunnel ? >>>>> >>>>>There can't be both a tunnel and bridge. It's one or the other. This >>>>>goes for all scenarios, including roads. >>>>> >>>>>DaveF >>>>> >>>>>___ >>>>>talk mailing list >>>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>___ >>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: [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
OK ! >Saturday, June 13, 2020 4:25 PM -05:00 from Shawn K. Quinn >: > >On 6/13/20 09:08, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote: >> If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a >> person from the data group as an editor, >> >> asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to >> me, why are you telling me I can not use >> >> google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like >> in my local area 7 months old. > >From the Google Maps/Earth Additional Terms of Service: > >> 2. Prohibited Conduct. Your compliance with this Section 2 is a >> condition of your license to use Google Maps/Google Earth. When using >> Google Maps/Google Earth, you may not (or allow those acting on your >> behalf to): >[...] >> e. use Google Maps/Google Earth to create or augment any other >> mapping-related dataset (including a mapping or navigation dataset, >> business listings database, mailing list, or telemarketing list) for >> use in a service that is a substitute for, or a substantially similar >> service to, Google Maps/Google Earth; > >This is one reason why you're not allowed to use it as a source. If you >need to measure distance, use the measuring tool in JOSM. > >-- >Shawn K. Quinn < skqu...@rushpost.com > >http://www.rantroulette.com >http://www.skqrecordquest.com > >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Google earth, Google maps
OK ! >Saturday, June 13, 2020 3:56 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:20 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> >> I am not copying any thing, just looking at a satellite view from google . >> >> it was a ruler. >This isn't really about OSM, it is about the Google Maps Terms of Service, >which by using Google Maps, you agree to abide by. This states in part: "you >may not ...use Google Maps/Google Earth to create or augment any other >mapping-related dataset..." This would include the ruler I would think as well >as "looking at a satellite view." > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
OK ! >Saturday, June 13, 2020 3:56 PM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > > >On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:20 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >> >> I am not copying any thing, just looking at a satellite view from google . >> >> it was a ruler. >This isn't really about OSM, it is about the Google Maps Terms of Service, >which by using Google Maps, you agree to abide by. This states in part: "you >may not ...use Google Maps/Google Earth to create or augment any other >mapping-related dataset..." This would include the ruler I would think as well >as "looking at a satellite view." > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] river - stream
i did not write the e-mail program, but it looks like your talking about (reply all) not (reply). >Saturday, June 13, 2020 2:28 PM -05:00 from Dave F via talk >: > >Could you please reply to the forum list not just the sender. I assume you're >the OP. Difficult to tell when you use different email addresses. > >>then why is the picture on top of the bridge when bridge is added. > >You appear to be confusing the ID editor with actual renderings of the map. >How it appears i iD when in edit mode is irrelevant. We map & tag so renderers >can produce detailed maps. > > >On 06/06/2020 01:57, John D. wrote: >>tunnel looks better than bridge, water is still visible under the layer of >>bridge, or area, does not hide water. >> >>tunnel hides water. >> >>>Friday, June 5, 2020 8:43 AM -05:00 from Dave F via talk >>> : >>> >>>On 05/06/2020 13:45, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> when the river stream comes to the bridge can you split and add tunnel ? >>>There can't be both a tunnel and bridge. It's one or the other. This >>>goes for all scenarios, including roads. >>> >>>DaveF >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> >___ >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] Google earth, Google maps
I am not copying any thing, just looking at a satellite view from google . it was a ruler. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:40 AM -05:00 from Lester Caine : > >On 13/06/2020 15:08, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >> why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source > >First reason is that Google don't allow copying of their material to >other services. > >But the main reason is that all of the content in OSM is required to be >free of any copyright restrictions so anything you copy from ANY other >source, you have to ensure that source is 'old news' i.e. is out of >copyright. Where possible what appears should be personal observation of >local locations and not looked up on streetview for example. > >-- >Lester Caine - G8HFL >- >Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact >L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk >Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk >Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Google earth, Google maps
I am not copying any thing, just looking at a satellite view from google . it was a ruler. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:40 AM -05:00 from Lester Caine : > >On 13/06/2020 15:08, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >> why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source > >First reason is that Google don't allow copying of their material to >other services. > >But the main reason is that all of the content in OSM is required to be >free of any copyright restrictions so anything you copy from ANY other >source, you have to ensure that source is 'old news' i.e. is out of >copyright. Where possible what appears should be personal observation of >local locations and not looked up on streetview for example. > >-- >Lester Caine - G8HFL >- >Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact >L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk >Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk >Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Could/should editors detect/disallow huge changeset bboxes?
is it just rivers or would that included polygons, river banks, area ? Saturday, June 13, 2020 11:44 AM -05:00 from Joseph Eisenberg : I mostly have mapped in parts of Indonesia where there was no data, and the new road or river was mapped for the first time. Usually I try to split roads and rivers every ~10 kilometers. - Joseph Eisenberg On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 8:46 AM Mateusz Konieczny via talk < talk@openstreetmap.org > wrote: > > > >Jun 13, 2020, 08:03 by f...@zz.de : >>On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:19:46AM -0400, James wrote: >>>No they shouldn't, mapping roads in northern Canada, your bbox can become >>>quite large quickly as mapping logging roads/dirt roads is quick and easy, >>>but span over multiple kms >> >>The point is that the line/way of that road should also not span tens of >>kms. You should break that up every couple of kilometers. >Not alway, there are reasonable cases for mapping long roads without such >splits. > >In many poorly mapped places you can still map 100km of road/river >in one go, without need for splitting it. > ___ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ 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] Could/should editors detect/disallow huge changeset bboxes?
>i did that it was 10 feet than someone says it can not be 10 feet a mile or so >down the road and he is right > >so i changed it but it was 10 feet where i was. > >>Saturday, June 13, 2020 11:44 AM -05:00 from Joseph Eisenberg < >>joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com >: >> >>I mostly have mapped in parts of Indonesia where there was no data, and the >>new road or river was mapped for the first time. >> >>Usually I try to split roads and rivers every ~10 kilometers. >> >>- Joseph Eisenberg >> >>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 8:46 AM Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>talk@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>Jun 13, 2020, 08:03 by f...@zz.de : On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:19:46AM -0400, James wrote: >No they shouldn't, mapping roads in northern Canada, your bbox can become >quite large quickly as mapping logging roads/dirt roads is quick and easy, >but span over multiple kms The point is that the line/way of that road should also not span tens of kms. You should break that up every couple of kilometers. >>>Not alway, there are reasonable cases for mapping long roads without such >>>splits. >>> >>>In many poorly mapped places you can still map 100km of road/river >>>in one go, without need for splitting it. >>> ___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>___ >>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] [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
since the complainer removed the source (google map) do i remove the # as well ? >Saturday, June 13, 2020 11:09 AM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > >According to the Google Maps Terms of service, you cannot use it in any way to >make another map. [0] I would think that would include using its ruler if the >purpose of using the ruler is to edit OSM. > >[0] 2.d of https://www.google.com/help/terms_maps/ >On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:47 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>because i was asked to change my edit based on my own ruler measurement, >> >>but it was just a ruler on google maps. >> >>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:42 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us < >>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>If you were not copying Google Maps then why you were using the ruler? >>> >>>Why using ruler on Google Maps would be even necessary? >>> >>>Jun 13, 2020, 17:31 by talk@openstreetmap.org : >>>>i put them as a source i used a ruler on there map. >>>> >>>> >>>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:59 by eric.lad...@gmail.com : >>>>>>Yeah, be careful with Google Maps. It's owned and created by a company >>>>>>and if you copy from it and they can prove it, they could sue the OSM >>>>>>Foundation into oblivion. They used to even have their OWN satellites to >>>>>>obtain imagery. That's serious money. >>>>>That is not the main problem. Main problem is that it goes our own >>>>>fundamental rules. >>>>>Mappers must not use other maps* even if whoever hold copyright is unable >>>>>to sue for some reason. >>>>> >>>>>And "they can prove it" part may be misleading - you are not allowed to >>>>>copy even if you think that >>>>>you can hide the copying so that noone will notice it. >>>>> >>>>>*that is more complicated, we are must not copyrighted data on >>>>>incompatible licenes - >>>>>but if you are unsure what it means do not use other maps and ask for help >>>>>before doing this >>>>>> >>>>>>Typically, with local edits, I put "Local knowledge" as the source. >>>>>>Sounds more highbrow than "my eyeballs". >>>>>I usually put survey/memory depending on how recent my data is. >>>>>>IMO, if somebody is challenging one of your local edits, if they are not >>>>>>local also, they should be told as much and sent on their way - UNLESS >>>>>>it's something that relates to a mapping standard or best practice. >>>>>>Then, learn from your mistakes and move on. >>>>>+1 >>>>>>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:32 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>>>>talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>>>>this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >>>>>Have you copied that map? I am unsure how the distance measuring tool >>>>>relates to "why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via >>>>>>>>Talk-us < talk...@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months >>>>>>>>old." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>FYI, world is larger than your local area. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk...@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>>>>>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a >>>>>>>>>person from the data group as an editor, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to >>>>>>>>>me, why are you
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Google earth, Google maps
since the complainer removed the source (google map) do i remove the # as well ? >Saturday, June 13, 2020 11:09 AM -05:00 from Mike Thompson >: > >According to the Google Maps Terms of service, you cannot use it in any way to >make another map. [0] I would think that would include using its ruler if the >purpose of using the ruler is to edit OSM. > >[0] 2.d of https://www.google.com/help/terms_maps/ >On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:47 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>because i was asked to change my edit based on my own ruler measurement, >> >>but it was just a ruler on google maps. >> >>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:42 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us < >>>talk-us@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>If you were not copying Google Maps then why you were using the ruler? >>> >>>Why using ruler on Google Maps would be even necessary? >>> >>>Jun 13, 2020, 17:31 by t...@openstreetmap.org : >>>>i put them as a source i used a ruler on there map. >>>> >>>> >>>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>>>t...@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:59 by eric.lad...@gmail.com : >>>>>>Yeah, be careful with Google Maps. It's owned and created by a company >>>>>>and if you copy from it and they can prove it, they could sue the OSM >>>>>>Foundation into oblivion. They used to even have their OWN satellites to >>>>>>obtain imagery. That's serious money. >>>>>That is not the main problem. Main problem is that it goes our own >>>>>fundamental rules. >>>>>Mappers must not use other maps* even if whoever hold copyright is unable >>>>>to sue for some reason. >>>>> >>>>>And "they can prove it" part may be misleading - you are not allowed to >>>>>copy even if you think that >>>>>you can hide the copying so that noone will notice it. >>>>> >>>>>*that is more complicated, we are must not copyrighted data on >>>>>incompatible licenes - >>>>>but if you are unsure what it means do not use other maps and ask for help >>>>>before doing this >>>>>> >>>>>>Typically, with local edits, I put "Local knowledge" as the source. >>>>>>Sounds more highbrow than "my eyeballs". >>>>>I usually put survey/memory depending on how recent my data is. >>>>>>IMO, if somebody is challenging one of your local edits, if they are not >>>>>>local also, they should be told as much and sent on their way - UNLESS >>>>>>it's something that relates to a mapping standard or best practice. >>>>>>Then, learn from your mistakes and move on. >>>>>+1 >>>>>>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:32 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>>>>talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>>>>this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >>>>>Have you copied that map? I am unsure how the distance measuring tool >>>>>relates to "why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via >>>>>>>>Talk-us < talk-us@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months >>>>>>>>old." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>FYI, world is larger than your local area. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk-us@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>>>>>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a >>>>>>>>>person from the data group as an editor, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to >>>>>>>>>me, why are you tel
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Google earth, Google maps
because i was asked to change my edit based on my own ruler measurement, but it was just a ruler on google maps. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:42 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us >: > >If you were not copying Google Maps then why you were using the ruler? > >Why using ruler on Google Maps would be even necessary? > >Jun 13, 2020, 17:31 by t...@openstreetmap.org: >>i put them as a source i used a ruler on there map. >> >> >>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:59 by eric.lad...@gmail.com: >>>>Yeah, be careful with Google Maps. It's owned and created by a company and >>>>if you copy from it and they can prove it, they could sue the OSM >>>>Foundation into oblivion. They used to even have their OWN satellites to >>>>obtain imagery. That's serious money. >>>That is not the main problem. Main problem is that it goes our own >>>fundamental rules. >>>Mappers must not use other maps* even if whoever hold copyright is unable to >>>sue for some reason. >>> >>>And "they can prove it" part may be misleading - you are not allowed to copy >>>even if you think that >>>you can hide the copying so that noone will notice it. >>> >>>*that is more complicated, we are must not copyrighted data on incompatible >>>licenes - >>>but if you are unsure what it means do not use other maps and ask for help >>>before doing this >>>> >>>>Typically, with local edits, I put "Local knowledge" as the source. Sounds >>>>more highbrow than "my eyeballs". >>>I usually put survey/memory depending on how recent my data is. >>>>IMO, if somebody is challenging one of your local edits, if they are not >>>>local also, they should be told as much and sent on their way - UNLESS it's >>>>something that relates to a mapping standard or best practice. Then, learn >>>>from your mistakes and move on. >>>+1 >>>>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:32 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>>talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>>this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >>>Have you copied that map? I am unsure how the distance measuring tool >>>relates to "why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source"? >>>>> >>>>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us >>>>>>< talk-us@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>> >>>>>>You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. >>>>>> >>>>>>Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? >>>>>> >>>>>>"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months >>>>>>old." >>>>>> >>>>>>FYI, world is larger than your local area. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk-us@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>>>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person >>>>>>>from the data group as an editor, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, >>>>>>>why are you telling me I can not use >>>>>>> >>>>>>>google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in >>>>>>>my local area 7 months old. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>___ >>>>>>Talk-us mailing list >>>>>>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>___ >>>>>Talk-us mailing list >>>>>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>> >>>> >>>>-- >>>>Eric Ladner >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> > >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
because i was asked to change my edit based on my own ruler measurement, but it was just a ruler on google maps. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:42 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us >: > >If you were not copying Google Maps then why you were using the ruler? > >Why using ruler on Google Maps would be even necessary? > >Jun 13, 2020, 17:31 by talk@openstreetmap.org: >>i put them as a source i used a ruler on there map. >> >> >>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:59 by eric.lad...@gmail.com: >>>>Yeah, be careful with Google Maps. It's owned and created by a company and >>>>if you copy from it and they can prove it, they could sue the OSM >>>>Foundation into oblivion. They used to even have their OWN satellites to >>>>obtain imagery. That's serious money. >>>That is not the main problem. Main problem is that it goes our own >>>fundamental rules. >>>Mappers must not use other maps* even if whoever hold copyright is unable to >>>sue for some reason. >>> >>>And "they can prove it" part may be misleading - you are not allowed to copy >>>even if you think that >>>you can hide the copying so that noone will notice it. >>> >>>*that is more complicated, we are must not copyrighted data on incompatible >>>licenes - >>>but if you are unsure what it means do not use other maps and ask for help >>>before doing this >>>> >>>>Typically, with local edits, I put "Local knowledge" as the source. Sounds >>>>more highbrow than "my eyeballs". >>>I usually put survey/memory depending on how recent my data is. >>>>IMO, if somebody is challenging one of your local edits, if they are not >>>>local also, they should be told as much and sent on their way - UNLESS it's >>>>something that relates to a mapping standard or best practice. Then, learn >>>>from your mistakes and move on. >>>+1 >>>>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:32 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>>>talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>>>this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >>>Have you copied that map? I am unsure how the distance measuring tool >>>relates to "why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source"? >>>>> >>>>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us >>>>>>< talk...@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>> >>>>>>You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. >>>>>> >>>>>>Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? >>>>>> >>>>>>"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months >>>>>>old." >>>>>> >>>>>>FYI, world is larger than your local area. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk...@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>>>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person >>>>>>>from the data group as an editor, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, >>>>>>>why are you telling me I can not use >>>>>>> >>>>>>>google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in >>>>>>>my local area 7 months old. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>___ >>>>>>Talk-us mailing list >>>>>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>___ >>>>>Talk-us mailing list >>>>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>>> >>>> >>>>-- >>>>Eric Ladner >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> > >___ >Talk-us mailing list >talk...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Google earth, Google maps
i put them as a source i used a ruler on there map. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > > > > >Jun 13, 2020, 16:59 by eric.lad...@gmail.com: >>Yeah, be careful with Google Maps. It's owned and created by a company and >>if you copy from it and they can prove it, they could sue the OSM Foundation >>into oblivion. They used to even have their OWN satellites to obtain >>imagery. That's serious money. >That is not the main problem. Main problem is that it goes our own fundamental >rules. >Mappers must not use other maps* even if whoever hold copyright is unable to >sue for some reason. > >And "they can prove it" part may be misleading - you are not allowed to copy >even if you think that >you can hide the copying so that noone will notice it. > >*that is more complicated, we are must not copyrighted data on incompatible >licenes - >but if you are unsure what it means do not use other maps and ask for help >before doing this >> >>Typically, with local edits, I put "Local knowledge" as the source. Sounds >>more highbrow than "my eyeballs". >I usually put survey/memory depending on how recent my data is. >>IMO, if somebody is challenging one of your local edits, if they are not >>local also, they should be told as much and sent on their way - UNLESS it's >>something that relates to a mapping standard or best practice. Then, learn >>from your mistakes and move on. >+1 >>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:32 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>talk-us@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >Have you copied that map? I am unsure how the distance measuring tool >relates to "why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source"? >>> >>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us < >>>>talk-us@openstreetmap.org >: >>>> >>>>You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. >>>> >>>>Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? >>>> >>>>"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months old." >>>> >>>>FYI, world is larger than your local area. >>>> >>>> >>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk-us@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person >>>>>from the data group as an editor, >>>>> >>>>>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, >>>>>why are you telling me I can not use >>>>> >>>>>google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in my >>>>>local area 7 months old. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>___ >>>>Talk-us mailing list >>>>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>___ >>>Talk-us mailing list >>>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> >> >>-- >>Eric Ladner > >___ >talk mailing list >t...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
i put them as a source i used a ruler on there map. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > > > > >Jun 13, 2020, 16:59 by eric.lad...@gmail.com: >>Yeah, be careful with Google Maps. It's owned and created by a company and >>if you copy from it and they can prove it, they could sue the OSM Foundation >>into oblivion. They used to even have their OWN satellites to obtain >>imagery. That's serious money. >That is not the main problem. Main problem is that it goes our own fundamental >rules. >Mappers must not use other maps* even if whoever hold copyright is unable to >sue for some reason. > >And "they can prove it" part may be misleading - you are not allowed to copy >even if you think that >you can hide the copying so that noone will notice it. > >*that is more complicated, we are must not copyrighted data on incompatible >licenes - >but if you are unsure what it means do not use other maps and ask for help >before doing this >> >>Typically, with local edits, I put "Local knowledge" as the source. Sounds >>more highbrow than "my eyeballs". >I usually put survey/memory depending on how recent my data is. >>IMO, if somebody is challenging one of your local edits, if they are not >>local also, they should be told as much and sent on their way - UNLESS it's >>something that relates to a mapping standard or best practice. Then, learn >>from your mistakes and move on. >+1 >>On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:32 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us < >>talk...@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >Have you copied that map? I am unsure how the distance measuring tool >relates to "why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source"? >>> >>>>Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us < >>>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >: >>>> >>>>You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. >>>> >>>>Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? >>>> >>>>"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months old." >>>> >>>>FYI, world is larger than your local area. >>>> >>>> >>>>Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk...@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person >>>>>from the data group as an editor, >>>>> >>>>>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, >>>>>why are you telling me I can not use >>>>> >>>>>google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in my >>>>>local area 7 months old. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>___ >>>>Talk-us mailing list >>>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>___ >>>Talk-us mailing list >>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> >> >>-- >>Eric Ladner > >___ >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] [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us >: > >You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. > >Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? > >"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months old." > >FYI, world is larger than your local area. > > >Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk...@openstreetmap.org: >>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person from >>the data group as an editor, >> >>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, why >>are you telling me I can not use >> >>google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in my >>local area 7 months old. >> >> > >___ >Talk-us mailing list >talk...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
this was a tool on the map that measured distance. >Saturday, June 13, 2020 9:29 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us >: > >You are not allowed to use Google Maps as source. > >Have you used Google Maps to edit OSM? > >"since all the maps on OSM are old news like in my local area 7 months old." > >FYI, world is larger than your local area. > > >Jun 13, 2020, 16:08 by talk-us@openstreetmap.org: >>If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person from >>the data group as an editor, >> >>asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, why >>are you telling me I can not use >> >>google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in my >>local area 7 months old. >> >> > >___ >Talk-us mailing list >Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps
If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person from the data group as an editor, asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in my local area 7 months old. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] Google earth, Google maps
If you people want me to prove my edit by adding a source, and a person from the data group as an editor, asks me to prove it, and i redo my edit and he does not get back to me, why are you telling me I can not use google as a map source, since all the maps on OSM are old news. like in my local area 7 months old. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could/should editors detect/disallow huge changeset bboxes?
>I understand fred, how do you know the date of the satelite view, in pre-fab a >building can go up > >in a day. >>Friday, June 12, 2020 7:24 PM -05:00 from Dave F via talk < >>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >> >>On 12/06/2020 15:32, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>> I am confused, >>> are you telling me being in chicago, where i can go to the place i am >>> editing, not relying on satellite view >>> which is behind by at least 7 month or more here, i should be messing >>> around in London. >>If you have information which you think is substantive enough & improves >>the quality of the OSM database, then why not? >> >>Frederik's claim OSM is restricted to "local knowledge" is false, & >>frankly I'm surprised he claimed it. >> >> > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could/should editors detect/disallow huge changeset bboxes?
>Friday, June 12, 2020 10:20 AM -05:00 from James : > >No they shouldn't, mapping roads in northern Canada, your bbox can become >quite large quickly as mapping logging roads/dirt roads is quick and easy, but >span over multiple kms If the satellite view ( imagery) in my local area is 7 mouths old +, why would anybody want me to edit in theirs backyard ? On 12/06/2020 15:32, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote:> I am confused > >>> are you telling me being in chicago, where i can go to the place i am> >>> editing, not relying on satellite view >>> which is behind by at least 7 month or more here, i should be messing >>> around in London. >> On Fri., Jun. 12, 2020, 11:10 a.m. ndrw, < nd...@redhazel.co.uk > wrote: >>Yes, you can map anywhere you want. There are no rules forbidding that, >>and there are projects like HOT that are mostly based on armchair mapping. >> >>Like with any edits, start with low risk/high impact changes (e.g. >>adding contents to poorly mapped areas), map only what you can see in >>the imagery, follow local conventions and listen to more experienced >>mappers. >> >>More guidelines: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Armchair_mapping >> >>Ndrw >> >> >> ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could/should editors detect/disallow huge changeset bboxes?
I am confused,
are you telling me being in chicago, where i can go to the place i am editing,
not relying on satellite view
which is behind by at least 7 month or more here, i should be messing around in
London.
>Friday, June 12, 2020 9:26 AM -05:00 from Dave F via talk
>:
>
>On 12/06/2020 14:44, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 12.06.20 15:22, Dave F via talk wrote:
>>> There is a lot of negativity about large changsets, but assessment of
>>> them should be based on quality, not quantity.
>> Yes, we're not discussing a popup that says "You dumbass, why did you
>> create a world-spanning changeset?" ;)
>
>I'm not convinced that's true. Already in this thread someone is blaming
>large changesets purely because the verifying software they're using
>isn't capable of dealing with them. Judge on quality not quantity.
>
>> The way in which editors deal with that would likely differ; in JOSM it
>> might be a popup that says "are you sure?" and in ID it might be a
>> floating warning somewhere.
>>
>> Your example of a world-wide spelling fix as an acceptable edit does not
>> agree with me; these edits often have unwanted side effects. See
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org ("if someone has described a 'horse' as a
>> 'kow' correcting the spelling to 'cow' does not make the description
>> correct").
>
>Tenuous & assumptive.
>It was just one "example".
>
>> OSM is a project of local knowlege.
>
>Just because you believe that, it doesn't make it so.
>Knowledge which effects OSM comes from many sources:
>A walk though town where a new shop has opened, or BBC world news which
>reports how a Far Eastern bridge building project has been cancelled &
>the proposed data requires removing.
>
>> World-spanning changesets compatible
>> with that idea are not impossible but rare; and erroneous or even
>> rule-violating changesets
>
>These rules require amending as they're based purely on size & the
>criticism is usually in the form of " "You dumbass, why did you create a
>world-spanning changeset?". Judge on quality not quantity.
>
>> are much more frequent among world-spanning
>> changesets than among everyday small bbox changesets.
>I'm not convinced. This perception only occurs because changesets over
>large areas stand out.
>
>Cheers
>DaveF
>
>___
>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] [Talk-us] Edit Attacks
I should have said, he is obsessed with rivers in this area, and I have stepped on his toes, but I was going by the wiki, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:waterway%3Driverbank#Problems_with_giant_river_multipolygons https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway=riverbank#Choice_of_size_of_the_multipolygon_relations_for_riverbank_mapping and this was a 10 year old 81 mile polygon a download from the National Hydrography Dataset. But does that give him the right to go after my days edits and re-edit them ? Thursday, June 11, 2020 12:43 PM -05:00 from Russell Nelson : On 6/10/20 7:21 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us wrote: > I am not a native speaker, but as far as I know "freak" is pejorative > and quite strong > slur. > It's not necessarily negative. It's a description of someone who is enthralled by something. In context, it could be negative or positive. I mean, we're all map freaks here, aren't we? ___ Talk-us mailing list talk...@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Edit Attacks
>I meant he is a person that is obsessed with his map and that rivers in this >town are his and not to touch his edits. > > >>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:21 PM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us < >>talk...@openstreetmap.org >: >> >>I am not a native speaker, but as far as I know "freak" is pejorative and >>quite strong >>slur. >> >>If I am right and it has strong negative associations - please do not use it >>on mailing lists >>or elsewhere in OSM. >> >>Jun 10, 2020, 23:41 by talk...@openstreetmap.org: >>>this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with somebody >>>that was >>>calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat surface >>>and then explaned >>>how to list it as non active. >>> >>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160 >>> >>>but the thing is the river was a 10 year old 81 mile download that maye >>>should not be as to the Wiki. >>>and this guy must be a river freak just like the bus stop guy who thought he >>>own the map. >>> Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:26 PM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < talk@openstreetmap.org >: Can you link any specific changeset damaging data or object that was deleted and should not be? Linked ones http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=86230442 http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=85357849 appear to not be problematic ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949#map=9/41.8982/-87.7286 is on boundary of unreasonably large relation, but it is not something very problematic) Jun 10, 2020, 15:27 by talk...@openstreetmap.org: > Last week I edited a 10 year old, 81 mile MultiPolygon with GHOSTS in >the ID editor, all I know, Someone > >took offence to that, >https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/85357849#map=13/42.0813/-87.8854 > >and attacked all my edits of that day, and as he moved from north to >south, every thing I did for the > >last year. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 , with >things other people had already > >called me on, (discussion). so exposing my self everything I have done >in the last 24 hours is under question > >from people who are not local but in Europe. even my visit to the golf >course is in question a 7 year stale edit. > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>___ >>Talk-us mailing list >>talk...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit Attacks
>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:17 PM -05:00 from John D. : > >other than breaking it up into little bits as in the wiiki. > >I got rid of the GHOSTS lines. > >>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:13 PM -05:00 from Warin < 61sundow...@gmail.com >: >> >>The Changeset: 85357849 comment is "multipolygons for the entire river offer >>no tangible advantages and not to be used." >> >>Sorry but I don't think that is a great comment. >>Is there any advantage in what you did? >>If so, what did you do and what are the advantages? >> >> >>On 11/6/20 8:40 am, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>when i look at the changeset it went to the guy, but did not tell me what he >>>did. i have had that discussion >>>before with somebody else that must be listed and we agreed it was a land >>>fill, with a golf course on top it >>>is a very small part of the top of the hill only 9 holes only, >>>how many times do i have to go back and defend my edits ? how many times do >>>i have to go back >>>and redo my edits. >>>it is a very big hill that is collecting gas and making electricity. and >>>there still digging on it, and a snow hill >>>and park on the back side. >>>if the edit is wrong then add and correct not do what was done i have had 2 >>>people ask me to explane my >>>one edit and have me look what i did and correct not jump in and demand. >> >>People ask questions whey they don't understand. >> >>Explain your edits better in the change set comments, it helps others >>understand what is being done, why it is being done and the source of the >>information. I note that there is no source given ... is that a 'feature' of >>iD? In JOSM there is a source statement for each change set, if it is there >>... use it. >> >>If they understand but disagree then discussion should take place. Don't take >>it personally, most are here to help make the map better. >>> >>>>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 4:53 PM -05:00 from Andy Townsend < >>>>ajt1...@gmail.com >: >>>> >>>>On 10/06/2020 22:41, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote: >>>>> this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with >>>>> somebody that was >>>>> calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat >>>>> surface and then explaned >>>>> how to list it as non active. >>>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160 >>>> >>>> >>>>Well that's been a golf course for only a month: >>>> >>>>http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=802256628 >>>> >>>>If that isn't a golf course, I suggest you discuss that with the person >>>>who added that in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84983669 . >>>> >>>> >>>>> but the thing is the river was a 10 year old 81 mile download that >>>>> maye should not be as to the Wiki. >>>>> and this guy must be a river freak just like the bus stop guy who >>>>> thought he own the map. >>>>> >>>>As I suggested earlier, it'd definitely make sense to split up some of >>>>the huge "natural=water; water=river" areas such as >>>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949 , but anyone who does that >>>>will need to do it in such as way that it doesn't accidentally delete >>>>large lengths of riverbank (which happened last time). >>>i do not think i did, is says do not do the entire river, i broke it up into >>>little bits, and only >>>the wide parts. >>>and what ever he did the ghosts are back. >>>> >>>>Best Regards, >>>> >>>>Andy >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >> >>___ >>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] Edit Attacks
when i look at the changeset it went to the guy, but did not tell me what he did. i have had that discussion before with somebody else that must be listed and we agreed it was a land fill, with a golf course on top it is a very small part of the top of the hill only 9 holes only, how many times do i have to go back and defend my edits ? how many times do i have to go back and redo my edits. it is a very big hill that is collecting gas and making electricity. and there still digging on it, and a snow hill and park on the back side. if the edit is wrong then add and correct not do what was done i have had 2 people ask me to explane my one edit and have me look what i did and correct not jump in and demand. >Wednesday, June 10, 2020 4:53 PM -05:00 from Andy Townsend < ajt1...@gmail.com >>: > >On 10/06/2020 22:41, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote: >> this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with >> somebody that was >> calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat >> surface and then explaned >> how to list it as non active. >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160 > > >Well that's been a golf course for only a month: > >http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=802256628 > >If that isn't a golf course, I suggest you discuss that with the person >who added that in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84983669 . > > >> but the thing is the river was a 10 year old 81 mile download that >> maye should not be as to the Wiki. >> and this guy must be a river freak just like the bus stop guy who >> thought he own the map. >> >As I suggested earlier, it'd definitely make sense to split up some of >the huge "natural=water; water=river" areas such as >https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949 , but anyone who does that >will need to do it in such as way that it doesn't accidentally delete >large lengths of riverbank (which happened last time). i do not think i did, is says do not do the entire river, i broke it up into little bits, and only the wide parts. and what ever he did the ghosts are back. > >Best Regards, > >Andy > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Edit Attacks
this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with somebody that was calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat surface and then explaned how to list it as non active. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160 but the thing is the river was a 10 year old 81 mile download that maye should not be as to the Wiki. and this guy must be a river freak just like the bus stop guy who thought he own the map. >Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:26 PM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > >Can you link any specific changeset damaging data >or object that was deleted and should not be? > >Linked ones >http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=86230442 >http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=85357849 >appear to not be problematic > >( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949#map=9/41.8982/-87.7286 >is on boundary of unreasonably large relation, but it is not >something very problematic) > >Jun 10, 2020, 15:27 by talk...@openstreetmap.org: >> Last week I edited a 10 year old, 81 mile MultiPolygon with GHOSTS in >>the ID editor, all I know, Someone >> >>took offence to that, >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/85357849#map=13/42.0813/-87.8854 >> >>and attacked all my edits of that day, and as he moved from north to south, >>every thing I did for the >> >>last year. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 , with things >>other people had already >> >>called me on, (discussion). so exposing my self everything I have done in >>the last 24 hours is under question >> >>from people who are not local but in Europe. even my visit to the golf course >>is in question a 7 year stale edit. >> >> >> > >___ >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: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Edit Attacks
this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with somebody that was calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat surface and then explaned how to list it as non active. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160 but the thing is the river was a 10 year old 81 mile download that maye should not be as to the Wiki. and this guy must be a river freak just like the bus stop guy who thought he own the map. >Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:26 PM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > >Can you link any specific changeset damaging data >or object that was deleted and should not be? > >Linked ones >http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=86230442 >http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=85357849 >appear to not be problematic > >( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949#map=9/41.8982/-87.7286 >is on boundary of unreasonably large relation, but it is not >something very problematic) > >Jun 10, 2020, 15:27 by talk-us@openstreetmap.org: >> Last week I edited a 10 year old, 81 mile MultiPolygon with GHOSTS in >>the ID editor, all I know, Someone >> >>took offence to that, >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/85357849#map=13/42.0813/-87.8854 >> >>and attacked all my edits of that day, and as he moved from north to south, >>every thing I did for the >> >>last year. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 , with things >>other people had already >> >>called me on, (discussion). so exposing my self everything I have done in >>the last 24 hours is under question >> >>from people who are not local but in Europe. even my visit to the golf course >>is in question a 7 year stale edit. >> >> >> > >___ >talk mailing list >t...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit Attacks
Last week I edited a 10 year old, 81 mile MultiPolygon with GHOSTS in the ID editor, all I know, Someone took offence to that, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/85357849#map=13/42.0813/-87.8854 and attacked all my edits of that day, and as he moved from north to south, every thing I did for the last year. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 , with things other people had already called me on, (discussion). so exposing my self everything I have done in the last 24 hours is under question from people who are not local but in Europe. even my visit to the golf course is in question a 7 year stale edit. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Edit Attacks
Last week I edited a 10 year old, 81 mile MultiPolygon with GHOSTS in the ID editor, all I know, Someone took offence to that, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/85357849#map=13/42.0813/-87.8854 and attacked all my edits of that day, and as he moved from north to south, every thing I did for the last year. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 , with things other people had already called me on, (discussion). so exposing my self everything I have done in the last 24 hours is under question from people who are not local but in Europe. even my visit to the golf course is in question a 7 year stale edit. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] fake mapping
i found source-date, but if i can not on the ground verifies i do not think i should change, they did not like non gofers waking around. >Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > > > > >Jun 9, 2020, 00:26 by t...@openstreetmap.org: >>just to be safe i went to a pre-edit location, less than 5 miles 2 hours by >>public transportation. >> >>the satellite view was wrong, the river area were ponds because of the dam, >>which was not there in 1969 >> >>when we went down the river in cement tubs, and the golf cart paths were all >>marked unmaintained track road. >> >>there are pologons around the greens, holes and fairways not the whole >>property, where natural woods >> >>that have separate pologons. >> >>the point is there is to much there to fix. >Yes, in many cases map should be updated. If aerial images are wrong it is >useful to add >something like >note=edited based on survey, as of 2020 Bing aerial imagery is outdated and >wrong > >___ >talk mailing list >t...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] fake mapping
i found source-date, but if i can not on the ground verifies i do not think i should change, they did not like non gofers waking around. >Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > > > > >Jun 9, 2020, 00:26 by talk@openstreetmap.org: >>just to be safe i went to a pre-edit location, less than 5 miles 2 hours by >>public transportation. >> >>the satellite view was wrong, the river area were ponds because of the dam, >>which was not there in 1969 >> >>when we went down the river in cement tubs, and the golf cart paths were all >>marked unmaintained track road. >> >>there are pologons around the greens, holes and fairways not the whole >>property, where natural woods >> >>that have separate pologons. >> >>the point is there is to much there to fix. >Yes, in many cases map should be updated. If aerial images are wrong it is >useful to add >something like >note=edited based on survey, as of 2020 Bing aerial imagery is outdated and >wrong > >___ >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] river - stream
this was solved when someone said you can write your own. >Monday, June 8, 2020 9:35 PM -05:00 from Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > >On 9/6/20 12:01 am, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >> YES !, i guess what i am saying i would like to see more drop down >> options. > >How many options would you like? > >Enough for many pages of options? > >Add seasonal, open_hours, description, etc etc? > > >Personally I don't use drop down menus, prefer to tag what I see and >know rather than be influenced by them. YMMV. > > >___ >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] fake mapping
just to be safe i went to a pre-edit location, less than 5 miles 2 hours by public transportation. the satellite view was wrong, the river area were ponds because of the dam, which was not there in 1969 when we went down the river in cement tubs, and the golf cart paths were all marked unmaintained track road. there are pologons around the greens, holes and fairways not the whole property, where natural woods that have separate pologons. the point is there is to much there to fix. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] fake mapping
just to be safe i went to a pre-edit location, less than 5 miles 2 hours by public transportation. the satellite view was wrong, the river area were ponds because of the dam, which was not there in 1969 when we went down the river in cement tubs, and the golf cart paths were all marked unmaintained track road. there are pologons around the greens, holes and fairways not the whole property, where natural woods that have separate pologons. the point is there is to much there to fix. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] river - stream
YES !, i guess what i am saying i would like to see more drop down options. >Monday, June 8, 2020 8:36 AM -05:00 from nwastra : > >I am not very familiar with the iD editor but I notice that where a stream and >highway cross, what boxes and dropdowns are offered depends what you have >selected. >If you have the stream selected you will be offered tunnel/culvert/layer/etc >as options. >If you have the highway selected you will be offered bridge/tunnel/ford/etc. > >Is this the reason you are not seeing the options you expect? > >On 8 Jun 2020, at 10:49 pm, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk < talk@openstreetmap.org >> wrote: > >>>i guss what i am saying, add a tunnel is wrong, when the road is on the >>>bridge, and the drop down box >> >>says culvert. again i am only seeing the ID map. >>i just tried it, it only says add a tunnel, then river is under bridge. >>>Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>Is there anything wrong with that? >>> >>> >>>Jun 8, 2020, 13:57 by talk@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>in the ID editor, if you draw a stream - river line, and it crosses a >>>>>road, you get a warning, with the suggestion >>>>> >>>>>add a bridge or tunnel. >>>>> >>>>>>Monday, June 8, 2020 5:13 AM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>>>>>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >>>>>> >>>>>>Am Sa., 6. Juni 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk < >>>>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>>>Do you have an example? >>>>>> >>>>>>A simple example for a tunnel (here subway) on a bridge would be this: >>>>>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757824513 >>>>>>https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_Morand >>>>>> >>>>>>>Whether it's a bridge or tunnel is fairly easily defined by determining >>>>>>>which is taking the load. >>>>>>>If a tunnel's structure was removed, would whitewater's above it >>>>>>>collapse? If 'yes' then it's a tunnel. >>>>>> >>>>>>what I wrote was that - according to some technical definitions - a >>>>>>tunnel must not have something above it, it may be sufficient that it is >>>>>>closed and long enough. I am not sure if we share these definitions in >>>>>>OSM. >>>>>>According to the current wiki, "a tunnel is an underground passage for a >>>>>>road or similar." and also: " tunnel =* is used for roads, railway line, >>>>>>canals etc that run underground (in tunnel ). " This doesn't appear to >>>>>>be exhaustive / complete, tunnels could also run underwater, above ground >>>>>>and potentially in the future even in space, no? >>>>>>Many current underwater tunnels are also "underground", as they are often >>>>>>running in a man made structure (embankment like) on the ground or below >>>>>>the water body/river in the ground >>>>>> >>>>>>Cheers >>>>>>Martin >>>>>>___ >>>>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] river - stream
YES !, i guess what i am saying i would like to see more drop down options. >Monday, June 8, 2020 8:36 AM -05:00 from nwastra : > >I am not very familiar with the iD editor but I notice that where a stream and >highway cross, what boxes and dropdowns are offered depends what you have >selected. >If you have the stream selected you will be offered tunnel/culvert/layer/etc >as options. >If you have the highway selected you will be offered bridge/tunnel/ford/etc. > >Is this the reason you are not seeing the options you expect? > >On 8 Jun 2020, at 10:49 pm, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk < t...@openstreetmap.org >> wrote: > >>>i guss what i am saying, add a tunnel is wrong, when the road is on the >>>bridge, and the drop down box >> >>says culvert. again i am only seeing the ID map. >>i just tried it, it only says add a tunnel, then river is under bridge. >>>Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>Is there anything wrong with that? >>> >>> >>>Jun 8, 2020, 13:57 by t...@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>in the ID editor, if you draw a stream - river line, and it crosses a >>>>>road, you get a warning, with the suggestion >>>>> >>>>>add a bridge or tunnel. >>>>> >>>>>>Monday, June 8, 2020 5:13 AM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>>>>>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >>>>>> >>>>>>Am Sa., 6. Juni 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk < >>>>>>t...@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>>>Do you have an example? >>>>>> >>>>>>A simple example for a tunnel (here subway) on a bridge would be this: >>>>>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757824513 >>>>>>https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_Morand >>>>>> >>>>>>>Whether it's a bridge or tunnel is fairly easily defined by determining >>>>>>>which is taking the load. >>>>>>>If a tunnel's structure was removed, would whitewater's above it >>>>>>>collapse? If 'yes' then it's a tunnel. >>>>>> >>>>>>what I wrote was that - according to some technical definitions - a >>>>>>tunnel must not have something above it, it may be sufficient that it is >>>>>>closed and long enough. I am not sure if we share these definitions in >>>>>>OSM. >>>>>>According to the current wiki, "a tunnel is an underground passage for a >>>>>>road or similar." and also: " tunnel =* is used for roads, railway line, >>>>>>canals etc that run underground (in tunnel ). " This doesn't appear to >>>>>>be exhaustive / complete, tunnels could also run underwater, above ground >>>>>>and potentially in the future even in space, no? >>>>>>Many current underwater tunnels are also "underground", as they are often >>>>>>running in a man made structure (embankment like) on the ground or below >>>>>>the water body/river in the ground >>>>>> >>>>>>Cheers >>>>>>Martin >>>>>>___ >>>>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] river - stream
YES ! >Monday, June 8, 2020 8:37 AM -05:00 from nwastra : > > > > >I am not very familiar with the iD editor but I notice that where a stream and >highway cross, what boxes and dropdowns are offered depends what you have >selected. >If you have the stream selected you will be offered tunnel/culvert/layer/etc >as options. >If you have the highway selected you will be offered bridge/tunnel/ford/etc. > >Is this the reason you are not seeing the options you expect? > > > On 8 Jun 2020, at 10:49 pm, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk < >talk@openstreetmap.org > wrote: > >>>i guss what i am saying, add a tunnel is wrong, when the road is on the >>>bridge, and the drop down box >> >>says culvert. again i am only seeing the ID map. >> >>>i just tried it, it only says add a tunnel, then river is under bridge. >>> >>> >>>>Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>>> >>>>Is there anything wrong with that? >>>> >>>> >>>>Jun 8, 2020, 13:57 by talk@openstreetmap.org : >>>>>>in the ID editor, if you draw a stream - river line, and it crosses a >>>>>>road, you get a warning, with the suggestion >>>>>> >>>>>>add a bridge or tunnel. >>>>>> >>>>>>>Monday, June 8, 2020 5:13 AM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>>>>>>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Am Sa., 6. Juni 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk < >>>>>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>>>>>>>Do you have an example? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A simple example for a tunnel (here subway) on a bridge would be this: >>>>>>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757824513 >>>>>>>https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_Morand >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Whether it's a bridge or tunnel is fairly easily defined by determining >>>>>>>>which is taking the load. >>>>>>>>If a tunnel's structure was removed, would whitewater's above it >>>>>>>>collapse? If 'yes' then it's a tunnel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>what I wrote was that - according to some technical definitions - a >>>>>>>tunnel must not have something above it, it may be sufficient that it is >>>>>>>closed and long enough. I am not sure if we share these definitions in >>>>>>>OSM. >>>>>>>According to the current wiki, "a tunnel is an underground passage for a >>>>>>>road or similar." and also: " tunnel =* is used for roads, railway line, >>>>>>>canals etc that run underground (in tunnel ). " This doesn't appear to >>>>>>>be exhaustive / complete, tunnels could also run underwater, above >>>>>>>ground and potentially in the future even in space, no? >>>>>>>Many current underwater tunnels are also "underground", as they are >>>>>>>often running in a man made structure (embankment like) on the ground or >>>>>>>below the water body/river in the ground >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Cheers >>>>>>>Martin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>___ >>>>>>>talk mailing list >>>>>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>>>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>___ >>>>talk mailing list >>>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >>___ >>talk mailing list >>talk@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >___ >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] VANDALISM !
That is a good question, I answered him on what he sent me, that he was complaining about in the form of a threat, as andy said, I was trying fix the ghost issue on a 10 year old National Hydrography Dataset, download that was one 81 mile multipolygon that was not even his edit, I answered him with the wiki. rule, and he attacked all my that day’s river edits some i have been working on for a year, attacking other issues next to the river as well things that have been all ready ? by others users. >Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:59 PM -05:00 from Alessandro Sarretta >: > >If this is the changeset ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 ), >where is the discussion? >Ale >On 07/06/20 17:33, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>86230442 >>>Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:47 AM -05:00 from Dave F via talk < >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>Provide a link to the changeset. >>> >>>DaveF >___ >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: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !
That is a good question, I answered him on what he sent me, that he was complaining about in the form of a threat, as andy said, I was trying fix the ghost issue on a 10 year old National Hydrography Dataset, download that was one 81 mile multipolygon that was not even his edit, I answered him with the wiki. rule, and he attacked all my that day’s river edits some i have been working on for a year, attacking other issues next to the river as well things that have been all ready ? by others users. >Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:59 PM -05:00 from Alessandro Sarretta >: > >If this is the changeset ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/86230442 ), >where is the discussion? >Ale >On 07/06/20 17:33, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>86230442 >>>Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:47 AM -05:00 from Dave F via talk < >>>t...@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>Provide a link to the changeset. >>> >>>DaveF >___ >talk mailing list >t...@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] river - stream
>i guss what i am saying, add a tunnel is wrong, when the road is on the >bridge, and the drop down box says culvert. again i am only seeing the ID map. > >i just tried it, it only says add a tunnel, then river is under bridge. > > >>Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >> >>Is there anything wrong with that? >> >> >>Jun 8, 2020, 13:57 by talk@openstreetmap.org: in the ID editor, if you draw a stream - river line, and it crosses a road, you get a warning, with the suggestion add a bridge or tunnel. >Monday, June 8, 2020 5:13 AM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >dieterdre...@gmail.com >: > >Am Sa., 6. Juni 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk < >talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>Do you have an example? >> > > >A simple example for a tunnel (here subway) on a bridge would be this: >https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757824513 >https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_Morand > > > >>Whether it's a bridge or tunnel is fairly easily defined by determining >>which is taking the load. >>If a tunnel's structure was removed, would whitewater's above it >>collapse? If 'yes' then it's a tunnel. > > > >what I wrote was that - according to some technical definitions - a tunnel >must not have something above it, it may be sufficient that it is closed >and long enough. I am not sure if we share these definitions in OSM. >According to the current wiki, "a tunnel is an underground passage for a >road or similar." and also: " tunnel =* is used for roads, railway line, >canals etc that run underground (in tunnel ). " This doesn't appear to >be exhaustive / complete, tunnels could also run underwater, above ground >and potentially in the future even in space, no? >Many current underwater tunnels are also "underground", as they are often >running in a man made structure (embankment like) on the ground or below >the water body/river in the ground > > > >Cheers >Martin > > >___ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >>> >>> >>> >>___ >>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] river - stream
>in the ID editor, if you draw a stream - river line, and it crosses a road, >you get a warning, with the suggestion > >add a bridge or tunnel. > >>Monday, June 8, 2020 5:13 AM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >> >>Am Sa., 6. Juni 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk < >>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>>Do you have an example? >>> >> >> >>A simple example for a tunnel (here subway) on a bridge would be this: >>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757824513 >>https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_Morand >> >> >> >>>Whether it's a bridge or tunnel is fairly easily defined by determining >>>which is taking the load. >>>If a tunnel's structure was removed, would whitewater's above it >>>collapse? If 'yes' then it's a tunnel. >> >> >> >>what I wrote was that - according to some technical definitions - a tunnel >>must not have something above it, it may be sufficient that it is closed and >>long enough. I am not sure if we share these definitions in OSM. >>According to the current wiki, "a tunnel is an underground passage for a road >>or similar." and also: " tunnel =* is used for roads, railway line, canals >>etc that run underground (in tunnel ). " This doesn't appear to be >>exhaustive / complete, tunnels could also run underwater, above ground and >>potentially in the future even in space, no? >>Many current underwater tunnels are also "underground", as they are often >>running in a man made structure (embankment like) on the ground or below the >>water body/river in the ground >> >> >> >>Cheers >>Martin >> >> >>___ >>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] VANDALISM !
>86230442 >>Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:47 AM -05:00 from Dave F via talk < >>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >> >>Provide a link to the changeset. >> >>DaveF >> >>On 07/06/2020 14:07, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>> IF someone, not local, relying on satellite views, goes after my good >>>faith edit, based on my on the ground >>> >>>surveillance thinks my edit was wrong trying to fix broken polygon’s, that >>>are making ghosts lines on the >>> >>>ID edit page. sends me a change-set discussion notice, telling me not to >>>edit what i edited, and i answer him >>> >>>with the Wiki rule that was the bases of my edit. then goes after my >>>current days edit and all related edits >>> >>>a years worth, (like a revenge thing) some technical but most based on what >>>he see’s on the satellite view >>> >>>that are, were WRONG. >>> >>>Not to re-edit fix, who, how do you put it all back ? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >>___ >>talk mailing list >>talk@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] VANDALISM !
IF someone, not local, relying on satellite views, goes after my good faith edit, based on my on the ground surveillance thinks my edit was wrong trying to fix broken polygon’s, that are making ghosts lines on the ID edit page. sends me a change-set discussion notice, telling me not to edit what i edited, and i answer him with the Wiki rule that was the bases of my edit. then goes after my current days edit and all related edits a years worth, (like a revenge thing) some technical but most based on what he see’s on the satellite view that are, were WRONG. Not to re-edit fix, who, how do you put it all back ? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] VANDALISM !
IF someone, not local, relying on satellite views, goes after my good faith edit, based on my on the ground surveillance thinks my edit was wrong trying to fix broken polygon’s, that are making ghosts lines on the ID edit page. sends me a change-set discussion notice, telling me not to edit what i edited, and i answer him with the Wiki rule that was the bases of my edit. then goes after my current days edit and all related edits a years worth, (like a revenge thing) some technical but most based on what he see’s on the satellite view that are, were WRONG. Not to re-edit fix, who, how do you put it all back ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] river - stream
then why is the picture on top of the bridge when bridge is added. >Friday, June 5, 2020 8:46 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > > > > >Jun 5, 2020, 14:45 by talk@openstreetmap.org: >>if water goes under a bridge, why in the ID editor is it pictured on top of >>the bridge, >Is layer tag set correctly? >> >>when the river stream comes to the bridge can you split and add tunnel ? >> >No, if it is under bridge then mapping it as a tunnel (culvert) is incorrect. > >___ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] river - stream
if water goes under a bridge, why in the ID editor is it pictured on top of the bridge, when the river stream comes to the bridge can you split and add tunnel ? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] river - stream
if water goes under a bridge, why in the ID editor is it pictured on top of the bridge, when the river stream comes to the bridge can you split and add tunnel ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?
then why are there tags ? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway and if the platform posts are still there ? >Tuesday, May 26, 2020 4:52 PM -05:00 from Jack Armstrong >: > >Thanks. I'll try that. > >>From: Warin < 61sundow...@gmail.com > >> >>Advise them to enter the historic railway into OHM ... or any historic object >>for that matter. This satisfies them that the object is mapped and frees OSM >>from it. > > > >___ >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] Should we map things that do not exist?
i would delete what i did, expanding on someone else edit, but what about something like a road that was never built and was mapped 7 years ago, with an edit 1 year ago ? >Sunday, May 24, 2020 11:39 PM -05:00 from Jack Armstrong >: > >Greetings. > >Recently, a user mapped “razed” railways inside a construction zone (link >below). These rails had been removed by our local mappers since they don’t >exist anymore. Using the latest imagery (Maxar), you can see the rails have >been completely removed from “Project 70”, a $1.2 billion Denver-area >transportation corridor construction project. > >I think this mapper has good intentions, but what is the point of mapping >something that does not exist? Doesn’t this clearly contradict the OSM Good >Practice wiki in regards the sections, “Verifiability”, “Map what's on the >ground” and “Don't map historic events and historic features”? The last >section states, " Do not map objects if they do not exist currently ." > >Should we tag (invisible) razed sidewalks? Should we leave (invisible) >destroyed buildings in place, tag them as razed and then create new buildings >on top of them? > >https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/39.78016/-104.94562 > > >___ >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] Should we map things that do not exist?
it was tagged ( proposed ), and asphalt. >Monday, May 25, 2020 11:56 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > >I would say that anyone has right to remove such objects. > >I am also unsure what would even be a correct tagging. never_existed:highway=*? > >(sole reason for possible keeping would be danger of accidental mapping it, but >given that it never existed it should not appear on any aerial images) > >May 25, 2020, 17:32 by talk@openstreetmap.org: >>? should a highway never built in 2011, mapped, that goes through a farm >>still be there even if tagged >> >>right, and if not who has a right to remove it ? >> >>>Monday, May 25, 2020 10:10 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk < >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >: >>> >>>May 25, 2020, 16:48 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: On 2020-05-25 16:20, Jack Armstrong wrote: >Why are railways given a special status? Nobody gives anything a status in OSM. Nothing is "approved" so nothing is "forbidden" either. >>>It is not really accurate - there is plenty of forbidden things (like running >>>imports without discussion, we have tags that are silently removed by >>>editors like iD and JOSM). >>> >>>We have voted on tags that are described as "approved". >>> >>>Even if " Nothing is "approved" " is true it does not mean that nothing is >>>forbidden. >>> >>>And other ways of giving various things various kinds of status. It is not even "forbidden" to use tags that someone has declared "deprecated". >>>This is true. Is there any case of a whole class of objects being removed from OSM on the grounds that they "do not belong"? Who would burn their fingers on that? >>>Depends on what you mean by "whole class of objects". If we are looking to set a precedent for that it would probably be wiser to pick on a less controversial and emotive subject. >>>We have precedent that entire classes and types of things are >>>out of scope. >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> > >___ >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] Should we map things that do not exist?
? should a highway never built in 2011, mapped, that goes through a farm still be there even if tagged right, and if not who has a right to remove it ? >Monday, May 25, 2020 10:10 AM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via talk >: > >May 25, 2020, 16:48 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: >>On 2020-05-25 16:20, Jack Armstrong wrote: >>>Why are railways given a special status? >>Nobody gives anything a status in OSM. Nothing is "approved" so nothing is >>"forbidden" either. >It is not really accurate - there is plenty of forbidden things (like running >imports without discussion, we have tags that are silently removed by >editors like iD and JOSM). > >We have voted on tags that are described as "approved". > >Even if " Nothing is "approved" " is true it does not mean that nothing is >forbidden. > >And other ways of giving various things various kinds of status. >>It is not even "forbidden" to use tags that someone has declared "deprecated". >This is true. >> >>Is there any case of a whole class of objects being removed from OSM on the >>grounds >>that they "do not belong"? Who would burn their fingers on that? >Depends on what you mean by "whole class of objects". >> >>If we are looking to set a precedent for that it would probably be wiser to >>pick on a less controversial and emotive subject. >> >We have precedent that entire classes and types of things are >out of scope. >___ >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] Relation: 1204546, polygon error.
i see ghosts lines in the ID editor, that keep on moving when i try to follow the line. and as the other guy said somewhere there is a break. but i also see 300 + relations which all light up when clicked on. >Thursday, May 14, 2020 10:09 PM -05:00 from Joseph Eisenberg >: > >Looking at >https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1204546#map=13/29.6738/-81.1861 - I >don't see any visual problems currently. What are you seeing? > >The only tagging problem I see is that the coastline here is not tagged >properly. This whole area looks like a salt water lagoon system, which should >be mapped with coastline, since it is marine salt-water. > >-- Joseph Eisenberg >On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 7:57 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk < >talk@openstreetmap.org > wrote: >>>has a ghosts water multipolygon, >>> >>>that keep moving over land. >>> >>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Polygons >>> >>>i can not see the break, and every in the middle is a relation ship. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ___ >>talk mailing list >>talk@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >___ >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] Relation: 1204546, polygon error.
>has a ghosts water multipolygon, > >that keep moving over land. > >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Polygons > >i can not see the break, and every in the middle is a relation ship. > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: trace and signs
>As to a mapping rule, do we node, (the point symbol in ID edit) put signs on >the map, > >and under what authority do we not put signs on the map. > >>Saturday, April 25, 2020 7:02 AM -05:00 from Warin < 61sundow...@gmail.com >: >> >>On 25/4/20 8:35 pm, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote: >>> Here are some more examples demonstrating that signs could be of >>> interest to travelers. >>> >>> - in this video the popular British travel video-blogger goes to great >>> lengths to get to the specific sign to record his video: >>> https://youtu.be/6RQlQDp1uiU?t=90 >>> >>> - it is customary during long distance cycling tours to take photos >>> near the signs, as it would confirm the itinerary of the tour: >>> >>> https://www.highlux.co.nz/category/cycle-touring/ >>> >>> or >>> >>> >>> https://www.alamy.com/fully-packed-bicycle-long-distance-bike-parked-at-frontier-sign-chile-argentina-good-bye-argentina-image184906663.html >>> >> >>Whilst tourist use signs to document their tour few of them are after a >>particular sign and those usually from someone else's trip photos. If >>they are after a particular sign then the location is probably gained >>from the photo and/or document not from a map. >> >>There is a place that I know of that had a sign and it attracted >>tourist. There were a few traffic accidents caused by these tourist >>looking/stopping for this sign. The sign has been removed for safety. As >>there is no sign there tourist do not slow or stop there any more, so >>not more accidents. It is a 'place=location' in OSM terms but I am >>loathed to map it for fear of recreating the problem. >> >> >>___ >>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] trace and signs
if in the ID editor there are points for picnic tables, what about a point tags as a sign. >Thursday, April 23, 2020 11:13 PM -05:00 from stevea >: > >Y'know, I might suggest some wiki-reading. Perhaps 80hnhtv4agou takes a look >at our wiki for leisure=park (messy as it has been) and how the tags all glom >together: tagging leisure=park and name=Fred's Park will cause our "current" >Standard renderer (Carto) to display this with a minty-green and >slightly-italicized typeface font to be selected to display these attributes >(named park) together. > >If 80hnhtv4agou is language-challenged (hey, that's OK), please offer us a >translation partner to his/her preferred dialect. Much can be and is arranged >to "simply work" in OSM. This, too. An interesting register, this. > >SteveA > >___ >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] Fwd: trace and signs
* how do you close out the trace on the map after edit ? * how do you tag a sign, mall, park, forest, that is name of the place, place name. -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Re[2]: Tag:manhole=telecom
I am trying to say the tag page is wrong, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:manhole=telecom the picture is a fiber optics splice enclosure not a manhole https://www.multicominc.com/product/pencell-pem-2436-24x36x24-buried-cable-enclosure/ https://www.thefoa.org/tech/ref/install/Microtrenching/Pages/25.html https://www.thefoa.org/tech/ref/appln/Prefab-underground.jpg this is a fiber splice manhole, https://www.jensenprecast.com/AT-T-Northern-California-a840/Telecom-Utility-Structures/Manholes-p14890/AT-T-4-x4-x4-fiber-optic-Intercept-Manhole-Page-1-of-2-d2315.pdf can we change the picture or put both on the same page with the legal industry names. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/manhole ( a man goes into the hole) [manhole] >Sunday, April 19, 2020 5:02 PM -05:00 from François Lacombe >: >To me, manhole applies in the two situations. >We should make a distinction between the "cap" visible from the surface and >the facility underground. >Same shape of "cap" (I call it the manhole actually) can hide really different >kind of stuff underground you won't be able to define without removing the cap. >In OSM, most mappers will only be able to describe what is visible on surface. >So this distinction would really be valuable. >When I look for "cable manhole" in google, I see both pavement and road >manholes. >Then I found this : >https://www.archiexpo.com/prod/dakota-group/product-150519-1693688.html >The body below surface, buried underground would be called a "cable room". >All the best >François >Le dim. 19 avr. 2020 à 23:14, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk < >talk@openstreetmap.org > a écrit : >> this is an enclosure just put in the ground, level 3 fiber. >>https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/mapillary.private.images/4KIBU1qe2CfjtcKtPHegeg/uploaded.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAR47SN3BMII5SHG7V=1587328637=8%2FzNiW16zbU9FjWy0JD17cNwIns%3D >>https://www.thefoa.org/tech/ref/install/Microtrenching/Pages/25.html >> >>this is a manhole, ameritech, a t & t. >>https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/mapillary.private.images/dSk9MhzCx0L0AAFzD-WqYQ/uploaded.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAR47SN3BMII5SHG7V=1587329086=o%2F0CqAKQC1ltl0F2vCqXVIecRP4%3D >> >>https://www.jensenprecast.com/AT-T-Northern-California-a840/Telecom-Utility-Structures/Manholes-p14890/AT-T-4-x4-x4-fiber-optic-Intercept-Manhole-Page-1-of-2-d2315.pdf >> >>>Sunday, April 19, 2020 3:06 PM -05:00 from Tom Pfeifer < >>>t.pfei...@computer.org >: >>>Dear 80hnhtv4agou, >>>As OpenStreetMap is a worldwide project, we have to agree on a tagging >>>scheme for an object that >>>is worldwide comprehensible. >>>We prefer to use the same tag for the same kind of thing. >>>Thus we prefer not to introduce synonyms or regional variations. >>>To make a feature be found more easily, "related terms" can be added in the >>>wiki. >>>In the particular case, some friendly colleague has already added ‹buried >>>cable enclosure› >>>to the manhole=telecom wiki page. >>>Kind regards >>>Tom >>> >>>On 19.04.2020 17:20, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:manhole=telecom >>>> in the united states this is not what it is called, so it was hard for me >>>> to find to use. >>>> can the name be changed. >>>> >>>> https://www.multicominc.com/product/pencell-pem-2436-24x36x24-buried-cable-enclosure/ >>>> to what it is ? __ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
