Re: [OSM-talk] Extending the 'geo:' uri scheme: Adding parameter 'osmid'

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 1/2/23 11:57, Sören Reinecke wrote:

Hey,

It came into my mind to get IETF to standardize a parameter explicitly 
linking to osm objects with their corresponding type and id.

[...]

Would it make sense for Google Maps, Bing Maps, etc to have similar 
schemes under the geo URI scheme? I don't think it would. The only 
reason it even comes close to making sense for OSM is because the users 
see those IDs much more often, and even then I still don't see the value 
in it, with the potential of it causing more problems than it solves.


--
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com


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

Re: [Talk-transit] Historic railways and route=train - is this good practice?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 9/2/21 12:03, Tony Shield wrote:
> Guys
> 
> Wandering through OPNVKarte I noted a railway line running through
> Kielder Water - an impossibility, further investigation showed the
> railway ways as abandoned or razed and part of a relation
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8213509/history , the Riccarton
> and Hexham railway. I suspect it was being rendered due to the
> route=train tag being set in the relation even though state=abandoned is
> present.
> 
> There is a similar rendering for the similarly abandoned Solway Junction
> Railway -
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9220571#map=11/54.9165/-3.2530=O
> 
> 
> As these two railways have long being extinct is it correct for them to
> be route=train which I regards as current use,  or should they be a new
> thing such as route=historic?

My gut reaction is to say this doesn't belong in OSM at all, but rather
OpenHistoricalMap or a similar project.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] id Editor auto-converts split polygons into MP relation

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 10/26/20 22:56, Bryce Cogswell via talk wrote:
> I agree it’s a little counterintuitive for experienced users but I
> understand the rationale: If you’re splitting a building (closed way)
> how is the result valid unless it’s converted to a multipolygon?

JOSM has no issue splitting a closed way into two separate closed ways.
It's entirely possible the user wants to have two separate buildings
(happens frequently when MapWithAI/RapID mistakenly decides that two or
three (or more) closely packed buildings are one big building).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Recent Trunk road edits

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 9/28/20 11:00, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Given NE2 was also in Flordia, I wouldn't rule out it's the same person.

I was considering the same possibility. Given he's been indefinitely
banned from editing, if we find out it is him doing this, should the
project consider legal action? This is rather wide-scale vandalism from
the looks of it.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Presenting MapComplete - a new easy-to-use editor

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/26/20 13:52, Pieter Vander Vennet wrote:
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I would like to present to you my newly built editor *MapComplete.

There is already an editor called StreetComplete, and the potential for
confusion concerns me.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Hands Off !, respect my (our) space

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/24/20 09:50, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote:
> 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 !

If everyone was restricted to editing their own neighborhoods or even a
5-mile (~8 km) radius of their home, the map would have almost nothing
on it.

You do realize most of the mapping in the US came from the Census
Bureau's TIGER data, which was imported by someone who can't possibly
have visited the entire US in the timeframe it took to upload that data?

You do realize that we have a lot of people from Amazon Logistics
editing the US as well? (Granted, mostly adding driveways and other
service roads, but it is still a contribution to the map.)

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/22/20 03:12, pangoSE wrote:
> Maybe we should have some kind of system flagging objects that has not
> been edited for x number of years and rate all objects in the database
> according to this?

Even if something is edited, not everything on the object will
necessarily have been verified at the time of that edit. Especially with
armchair mappers fixing errors found by QA tools like Keep Right or
doing single-purpose cleanups on
opening_hours/service_times/collection_times tags, etc.

> This would mean that a data consumer can decide based on the score if
> they want to include the information or not.
> 
> E.g. a high quality map should perhaps not contain objects with a
> revision older than 3 years (and no references or sources)

Some things just don't change over a period of three years. Had it been
added when I started mapping (2012-ish), the house I'm in now (actually,
most houses in this neighborhood) would have had no reason to be edited
over that time.

> Or even better: we could implement a verification system with a log that
> can be queried easily.
> 
> IMPLEMENTATION SUGGESTION:
> 
> GET Openstreetmap.org/api/verifications/
> Lists latest added verifications (outputs 10 entries,  can be
> used to get more,  can be used to output up to 300 entries)
> 
> GET Openstreetmap.org/api/verifications/1234
> Outputs verifications for osmid 1234 with the newest first (outputs 10
> entries,  can be used to get more,  can be used to output up
> to 300 entries)
> 
> POST Openstreetmap.org/api/verifications/1234
> Add a new verification for osmid 1234
> 
> On openstreetmap.org we have a new button for every object "Verify this
> object exists and is correct" which stores the date and userid in the
> database.
> 
> In JOSM we could add the possibility to download verification data for
> all selected objects or from a new option in the download dialog.
> 
> The latest verification date and count of verifications could be made
> available in a separate dump.
> 
> If we had such a system I believe the map data quality could increase
> considerably by making it dead simple to hide hide old unverified data
> from e.g. openstreetmap.org. A high-quality map we can be proud of could
> also give an impetus to local mappers to revisit trails and verify them.
> 
> WDYT?

How big will this database need to be? Who's going to store it and
maintain it?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/22/20 03:26, pangoSE wrote:
> I meant that a verification system does exist in Wikipedia and they
> now require references on all statements to keep up the quality of
> the articles which is sane IMO. We have no such system.

The big, huge difference between Wikipedia and OSM is that Wikipedia
does not allow original research at all, whereas OSM thrives on the
original research of everyone who contributes and in fact it is the
stuff that comes from third parties that has to be vetted more closely
for license compliance and copyright issues.

I agree we could do better in the quality control department but a lot
of things added to OSM will be added there first before any third
parties pick them up. That makes references a bit problematic, IMO.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/22/20 03:20, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:
> Nobody claims OpenStreetMap data contains no mistakes.

There are a lot of cases where OSM data is better than that in Google
Maps, Mapquest, Bing Maps, etc. Unfortunately there are also a lot of
cases where the converse is true; in particular, we have almost no
addressing data save for the few places where dedicated mappers have
added it via exhausting on-foot surveys (not to be confused with
exhaust*ive* surveys, speaking from experience here) or gotten lucky
enough to score a compatible import.

To its credit, Vespucci at least tells mappers "object may be out of
date" when it has sat unedited for over a year. I have missed
out-of-date data sitting right under my nose, the best example of this
being the Whitehall Hotel in downtown Houston (finally noticed and fixed
a while back).

> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes are designed as tool allowing to
> describe incorrect data that someone is unable or unwilling to fix (and
> yes, we have thousands of reports of mistakes)

I have also used notes (and seen the notes feature used by others) to
quickly note business information that I can't add in Vespucci or
another app right then and there. Yes, I do close a lot of my own notes,
and I suspect I'm not the only one.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Separating all metadata from coordinates in OSM into a wikibase instance (Was: Re: Roadmap for deprecation of name tags in OSM)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/9/20 07:29, pangoSE wrote:
> Of course this is also a big change which has to be considered carefully.
> 
> I believe linked data is the only sane way to go forward when it comes
> to metadata.
[...]

I think this adds a huge amount of complexity for a highly dubious
benefit. I'd also vote no and if this somehow came to pass anyway, I
feel so strongly about it that I'd consider starting a new project and
forking the current data model (a la FOSM around the time of the license
change).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposal for Software Dispute Resolution Panel

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/4/20 13:16, dorothea at osmfoundation.org (Dorothea Kazazi) wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> The OSMF board just published a proposal for a software
> dispute resolution panel:
> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2020/08/04/proposal-for-software-dispute-resolution-panel/
> 
> .. and is asking for comments and feedback.
> Please reply to this message ~ thank you.

I think this is a great idea and I would be interested in serving on the
panel. I do most of my edits with software besides iD (JOSM, Vespucci,
and StreetComplete), however I used iD almost exclusively for the first
2-3 years or so I contributed to OSM and still use iD from time to time
(mainly to make quick edits and map turn restrictions).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking structure as damaged or condemned

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 8/5/20 23:47, Dave Swarthout wrote:
> Another thing that will help future mappers is to add a note tag that
> informs them what you did and why so they don't add the building back
> again because it will still be visible in the satellite imagery. Add the
> date as well.

Also, when the building is demolished, you can change the tag to
not:building=house (or whatever it was). This is what I've seen other
mappers do when the imagery still shows buildings that a survey has
revealed are no longer standing. I think demolished:building=house is
also a valid tag as well.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Google earth, Google maps

[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 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Taking a break and a call for help

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 3/20/20 6:42 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> More constructively, let me deconstruct what I think needs to happen
> with Amazon Logistics generally (and can be constructively generalized
> to any other large fleet entities that might consider contributing to
> OSM):  Strongly consider contributing GPX traces from their fleet
> exclusively first, since covering ground with trucks is what they do
> best.  Let the volunteers do the lifting on the cartography if they're
> not going to hire people who are already familiar and involved to do the
> actual mapping. 

They also have some sort of imagery they are using for some edits that
they are not letting the rest of us have access to, for whatever reason.
Honestly, I'm starting to wonder if Amazon would rather make their own
proprietary maps, and if so, whether they should be invited to do so.

Until I pointed out they deleted an address interpolation way by
mistake, one of the mappers covering Houston apparently had no idea what
an address interpolation way even was (iD doesn't really help here, as
it doesn't render them distinctively like JOSM).

[from prior message at 6:07 PM]
> I'm taking a step back from being the primary editor in the Oklahoma region 
> until this passes.

I can do some additional armchair mapping in greater Tulsa and OKC,
since I'm only making necessary trips, mostly to the same locations and
thus getting a very limited amount of new data for Houston. Feel free to
let me know off-list of any "gotchas" for mapping Oklahoma.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Updating opening_hours for COVID-19.

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 3/13/20 15:36, Eric Christensen via Talk-us wrote:
> I've been updating the opening_hours for businesses and services as I 
> hear about them closing or changing their hours of operation for 
> COVID-19.  I'm also adding a note in the description with any 
> information the source is providing.
> 
> Seems like a good idea to keep people updated to what's open and what's not.
> 
> I wonder if anyone else is also doing this as well?

Bad idea since these are emergency changes and unlikely to be permanent.
I am putting in the "normal" hours where they are known, with the
understanding that people should know locations will be changing their
hours because of the situation and OSM's data will by necessity be out
of date for this item.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] When is your doctor a clinic?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 1/23/20 17:29, Jmapb wrote:
> However, truth be told, since the default map has ceased rendering
> healthcare=*, I've found myself tagging anything smaller than a hospital
> but larger than a doctor's office as amenity=clinic. For example, the
> "freestanding emergency departments" that were discussed on the Tagging
> list last April. This is one area where I'm not too shy about tagging
> for the renderer.

Our tagging scheme needs to catch up to this and offer another option
between clinic and hospital. I must have missed the discussion about
this, or I'm not on that list; why is healthcare=* no longer being rendered?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER-completeness visualizer?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 12/23/19 18:42, stevea wrote:
> One more thing we might potentially learn from our (OSM-US')
> experience (of the TIGER import of 2007-8), would be to insist upon a
> high bar for such large-scale imports in the future (this was our
> largest, without a doubt):  the proposers of the import must
> "pre-load for the back-end" a renderer that will both display and
> foster such goal-oriented tools to "finish the job with high-quality
> AFTER the import."  Import proposers would be required to author and
> maintain this renderer / server for as long as satisfactory
> QA-completion of the import takes.

I agree that we needed and still need a way to clean up all the
remaining untouched TIGER data. However, without the TIGER import, the
same 11-12 years would have been spent surveying and naming the roads
one by one and tracing them from (sometimes outdated) satellite/aerial
photos and we would probably still be way behind where we are with the
TIGER import. If it had been on me to trace my neighborhood from a blank
slate when I first started mapping, I might well have given up on OSM at
that point.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Need someone in the south to review an edit

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 6/13/19 23:29, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Brandify put up a rather suspicious mass deletion
> <https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/71184772/> recently.  I suspect
> that one of their customers stopped paying/had a term contract that
> expired and Brandify mass-deleted the entire chain.  But it is possible
> that the chain went out of business and their website is still active. 
> Could I get someone in the south to take a look at this and see if
> locations near you that was deleted closed?

One of the following changeset comments suggests the deletions in this
changeset are to remove duplicates added by mistake previously.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 3/20/19 02:03, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> is_in:continent=* is subjective as both division Earth landmass into
> continents[1] and boundaries between continents[2] are mostly
> subjective. There are many competing ways to split world into continents
> and OSM is not proper place to record all of them or one selected system.
> 
> In rare cases where one desires to assign locations to continents it can
> be done using location data inherently included in OSM objects and
> explicit tags added to part of objects are not really useful anyway.
> 
> is_in:continent tag should be removed to avoid confusing newbies and
> discourage adding new instances of this undesirable tag.
> 
> I propose to run an automated edit restricted to USA that will remove
> all instances of this tag.
[...]

I'm in favor; good riddance. (Cue "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead")

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 3/8/19 18:47, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
> 
> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
> building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
> your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story
> where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.

Some motels have two- or even three-story buildings. For me, the
defining difference would be that a hotel is closer to an airport or
business district and either has limited parking or charges for parking,
whereas motels as I know them never charge for parking, and are often
farther away from the business districts and airports.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Short 'connector' roads -- _link or not?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 11/20/18 16:23, Andrew wrote:
> The rule I've always followed is that it's the highest _link unless it's
> at an intersection with a named street, in which case the names roads
> just connect.
> 
> The only exception I think could make sense is if the /*only* /function
> of the connector is to connect to a service road–like in a
> right-in/right-out configuration– and U-turns aren't permitted. If the
> connector allows U-turns on a dual-carriage arterial, then it ought to
> be a link so it has the same priority in routing.

In the case of a median crossing (the third example in the original, and
the one I was commenting about earlier), I will make it a *_link instead
of service if it connects two service roads, so routing works as expected.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Short 'connector' roads -- _link or not?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 11/20/18 16:06, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi, 
> As I was creating more ‘unnamed roads’ challenges in MapRoulette, and spot 
> checking them, I came across a number of cases like this one:
> 
> https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3313/task/6414594  
> 
> To my mind these need to be fixed, but I wanted to ask here first, so I can 
> get the instructions right.  
> Either such a segment is part of a 3 or 4 way intersection of higher class 
> dual carriageway roads, in which case it should probably be named. 
> Or as in this case, it is an extension of the service road, and it should be 
> highway=service and remain unnamed like the service road itself.
> ..And I guess a third case is like 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/288576287 , which should be a _link?

I've been tagging those as *_link for years except on unclassified and
residential, which do not have a related *_link.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 11/14/18 07:46, wambac...@posteo.de wrote:
> are there cities (admin level 8) in the USA which  part of two counties?

I'm pretty sure parts of Houston, TX, extend past the Harris County
boundaries.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Possible roundabouts?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 09/30/2018 11:20 AM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> This could either be considered a roundabout (junction=roundabout) or a
> turning loop that happens to have two driveways sprouting out from it.
> Either way, given the width of the loop, the loop is one-way.

Keep Right will mark it as an error if a junction=roundabout has two or
fewer connections. I am in favor of tagging this as a turning loop
(though there needs to be a better way of tagging ways as turning loops,
as the current method conflicts with the real highway type).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
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] Discriminatory remarks was Re: Senseless [nationality], again

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 07/25/2018 05:33 AM, Bryan Housel wrote:
> Do you live in [area of questionable edits]?
> If not, why do you care whether the students want to map sidewalks there?

This point could have been made without a needless and inflammatory
remark against the original poster's country of origin.

While I do agree with Frederik that obvious rubbish should not remain in
the database, I think the "delete first, ask questions later" approach
is a bit too aggressive. But attacking someone by their nationality goes
way over the line of how decent people conduct themselves on a forum
like this.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] STOP - All vehicles must register

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 04/24/2018 03:16 PM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 11:10 AM Kevin Kenny
> <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.b.kenny%2b...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> The case of non-hard-surface roads brought this to mind.
>> [...]>> The requirement is that vehicles (or bicycles,
pedestrians, horses,
>> etc.) must stop, and the party leader fills out an entry in the book
>> that's kept in one of the boxes on the kiosk.
> > The first thing that comes to mind is a barrier=toll_booth:
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dtoll_booth
> 
> Perhaps also with a fee=no to indicate that you don't have to pay any money.

Looks like troll tagging to me. barrier=toll_booth is wrong on both
counts; there isn't necessarily a physical barrier (the gate might be
open, yet vehicles are still required to register) and there's no toll
being collected. Adding fee=no is just going to confuse people even
more. To me, it makes as much sense as highway=footway and foot=no.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Help fight advertising

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 03/01/2018 04:44 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> there have also been situations where a local mapper had diligently
> copied a business's sales slogan into the description tag and was
> then upset to see this removed.

If they are upset about it, tough turkey, it doesn't belong there.

> As more and more SEO firms start dumping their stuff onto OSM (and
> here I am not talking about those who actually talk to us and listen,
> but those who don't care), this is becoming a fight that needs to be
> fought by the community as a whole.

My approach this morning was different. I did an Overpass query for a
huge chunk of Texas (west of San Antonio, then going east including
Austin, Houston, and most suburbs, going to somewhere east of Beaumont)
for anything with a description tag. I then saved the layer from JOSM
and edited each occurrence of the description tag by hand (which also
made it easier to do things like just change "description" to "name"). I
made a few other related edits and submitted as changeset 57284276.
Generally speaking, I purged anything that looked like it was trying to
sell me on the business, including ad-copy-like descriptions of local
libraries. I also deleted any description=* that was duplicative of the
content of name=* or which added no useful information, and added
appropriate tags where description=* had been used by a sloppy/lazy
mapper to say things like "bowling alley" or to include opening hours.

By the time I had gotten around to doing this, I had completely
forgotten about the CSV export, though I was able to go through the
entire chunk I had exported with my text editor in the span of a
half-hour or so (I did a search for "description" and just kept hitting
"next match" when ready to move on).

My Java programming skills are nearly non-existent, but it is tempting
to (re-)learn enough to write a plugin to automate the process from
within JOSM, perhaps naming it something like "AdTerminator".

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 10/10/2017 10:10 AM, Tod Fitch wrote:
> I am inclined to simply delete the name if Tiger 2017 has no name. That will 
> do two things: 1. Make the map and routing less wrong. And 2. Allow the 
> normal QA tools we have indicate an issue (residential road with no name).
> 
> Thoughts?

Change the "name" key to "fixme" if there is no fixme tag already on
those roads.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 10/05/2017 05:30 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Question for you all:
> 
> What make Michigan state routes 5 and 10[1] trunks rather than primaries? 
> 
> To my mind these are highway=primary mainly because of at-grade
> intersections.. I am still confused about what makes a trunk road in the
> US. To my mind it's roads with no at-grade intersections but not built
> to interstate standards / not having an interstate designation... I'm
> not looking to open up a can of worms but I would really like to understand.

On a related note, I recently downgraded Allen Parkway in Houston from
trunk to primary, based on the somewhat recent reconfiguration, adding
traffic signals and lowering the speed limit (which I removed without
adding a replacement, knowing only that it's no longer 40 mph but I
forgot if they made it 35 mph or 30 mph). It's possible the western part
(closer to where it changes names to Kirby Drive) may still technically
qualify as trunk, but it is kind of an edge case even then.

Thoughts?

(Memorial Drive from Detering Street to Bagby Street, BTW, is pretty
much a textbook case of trunk in the US. Speed limit 50 mph, mostly
controlled access but not up to full freeway specifications. West of
Detering the speed limit drops and it goes through Memorial Park, but
there's still a relatively limited number of intersections.)

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Requesting to remove stoplines in San Jose

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 09/18/2017 08:39 PM, Vivek Bansal wrote:
> Hey, I noticed pfliers has added lots of unconnected ways w/
> `highway=stopline` all over San Jose. It’s really been cluttering up our
> workflows in iD, and now it’s triggering JOSM’s validator as we’re
> adding sidewalks. Can we remove them in one big mechanical edit? Even if
> the concept is good, they’d have to be remapped in order to be useful
> anyways. Maybe they should be a node along the centerline.  Or instead
> they should be a road_marking.

Ideally, the position of the highway=stop/yield node should convey this
information. In the case of a nearby highway=traffic_signals I could
maybe see road_marking=stopline, but not under highway=*.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 09/05/2017 12:48 PM, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
> Nick,
> 
> This is a study, not a manifesto. All this researcher is doing
> is looking for gender bias, IF it exists, in OSM mapping.
> So, I have to ask, what would you do if she does find certain
> areas of gender bias in OSM and reports them? Would you be
> angry and quit mapping? Would you ignore the report? Or would
> you make subtle changes in your mapping to avoid that bias?
> The choice is yours.
> 
> Charlotte

Well said. Though given the number of tags we have for things like bars,
pubs, brothels, strip clubs, etc versus the lack of tags for child care
facilities, the gender imbalance kind of outs itself. That said, I don't
mind another study to get a current measurement to see if it's gotten
better or worse since the last one.

The ultimate goal for OSM should be a project which everyone feels
welcome to be a part of, and which does not have a noticeable bias
towards either gender or any given race. Also, please realize just
because women are welcome to participate in OSM, does not necessarily
mean that some women will *feel* they are welcome.

-- 
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] Townships (was Re: Talk-us Digest, Vol 116, Issue 44)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 07/27/2017 11:16 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
> By wide consensus, and because it works this way in a large number
> (perhaps even unanimously?) of the 20 out of 50 states in which
> townships exist, townships are a "complete" division of a county,
> with no "leftovers."

Funny you mention this. Texas might be the first exception to the rule,
as The Woodlands is now being referred to as a "township" and this is
the first time that I've seen the term used within this state. I learned
this when passing a bus for The Woodlands Express (which previously had
been running under the auspices of some other agency).

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 07/13/2017 02:15 AM, Horea Meleg wrote:
> *According to US driving rules, are those turns allowed? Are you allowed
> to go on the link if you are coming from South?*

Probably not; even if technically not prohibited explicitly, it would
probably be cited as reckless driving or careless driving if attempted
with any non-trivial amount of other traffic on the road and observed. I
would add a turn restriction just for the sake of routing software that
would route hapless motorists on such a turn.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] SEO Damage to OSM

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 06/30/2017 11:21 AM, Clifford Snow wrote:
> Edits, from what appears to be a search engine optimization company
> (SEO), have damaged a number of ways in the US. Martijn Van Exel pointed
> out the problem on Slack the other day. What they did was to add their
> client to a street, often changing the name of the street to the
> company.  Fortunately they made it easy to find using overpass [1] by
> adding in the clients address, phone number, source and website. The
> query looks for addresses and websites on ways. 
[...]

This has been ongoing for a while. I honestly think calling it "SEO
damage" is charitable. This is hit-and-run vandalism done by people who
happen to be engaged in SEO as a business, and it needs to be handled
similarly to how we would normally handle vandalism.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 06/20/2017 06:43 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Depends on the region.  Oregon, Oklahoma, and California often includes
> the arrows anyway.

Texas often includes the arrows as well.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Need advice on a project i've taken on

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 06/10/2017 03:40 PM, Hans De Kryger wrote:
> I started about 2 weeks ago removing tiger zip data (Left & Right) from
> Arizona, my home state. When i finished i thought i'd continue with a
> few other states. As of now i've finished 15 states (1). The project is
> currently on hold due to concern from other mappers. I'm aware that mass
> edits on tiger data is not helpful due to it being hard to tell if it
> was touched since the tiger import.

What exactly is the rationale behind removing the zip code data?

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Edits by user jbarker2001 in Georgia

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 05/01/2017 10:58 AM, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> Just a heads up; this user seems to be adding some fantasy and/or
> proposed roads in with legit edits, mostly in central Georgia. I caught
> the most egregious thing (the unbuilt Eisenhower Parkway Extension) but
> there may be others that need cleaning up as well. Doesn't seem
> malicious at least, so hopefully comments on his(?) changesets will have
> an educational effect.

If he/she wants to do fantasy/fiction, there's always OpenGeoFiction.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Response from TIGER about "driveways

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 04/04/2017 04:17 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> In private emails, I've joked about all the "TIGER [excrement]" in the
> database, and referred to the process of making it more closely match
> reality as, "cleaning the cat box."

I've been known to refer to "TIGER barf" in my changeset comments. It's
the first thing that came to my mind, as cats (usually) cover their
excrement in the wild. Though, I can agree that sometimes, cleaning
these up on the map can be about as odious and tedious as "cleaning the
cat box" in real life...

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 04/04/2017 10:00 AM, Albert Pundt wrote:
> Recently somebody went around and bulk-"demoted" many northern NJ roads.
> Granted, some of these were marked as trunk and primary that would
> probably be better as primary and secondary, respectively, but this
> person made various trunk routes secondary (including major arterials
> such as US 206, NJ 15, US 46, NJ 31, etc. that should be no lower than
> primary), primary routes tertiary, and demoted most if not all secondary
> and tertiary routes to residential/unclassified. This seems like a way
> overboard change. I started to fix the more obvious errors here, but it
> seems like it would be way quicker and easier to revert the changeset
> and start over with fewer and more conservative reclassifications. What
> are your thoughts on this?

I'd lean towards reverting the entire changeset before it wipes out too
much additional work to do so. Also leave the user who did this a polite
but direct comment on the changeset that This Is Not Cool.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] [Talk-ca] Telenav mapping turn restrictions

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 04/03/2017 12:18 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> What I am looking for is more clarity (specifically in Canada but
> in the US also) as to traffic regulations that would make adding these
> restrictions not only valid but also a boost to the quality of OSM data.
> I would only want us to add these if there is no confusion regarding
> correctness and there is added value to adding them.
> 
> I'm cc-ing the US list as there are very similar traffic situations
> there and I'm interested in clarifying the situation there as well.

Around Houston, there were a couple of places where it was specifically
signed that one could not make a turn (usually a right turn) at the
intersection if there was a turning bay with a triangular/porkchop
island. However at others there is no explicit signage and in fact
there's one intersection where it's specifically signed that one can
turn out of the second lane at the intersection where it was signed
before "no right turn around island".

To more directly answer the question, I don't think there is a law in
Texas saying that one must use the turning lane if it's present. It's
often ill-advised to make a right turn at the intersection itself in
those cases, though.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 03/21/2017 11:56 AM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
> I tagged barrier=toll_booth on numerous "exit lanes" at the parking 
> facility at San Diego International Airport.  I also used this tag
> at a state park near me which has exactly the same sort of entrance 
> attendant you mention collecting what is really a "park usage fee
> for those who drive in" but it is called a "parking fee."
> 
> It seems to perfectly capture the semantic we wish to express.

On one hand, I can agree withe the principle behind re-purposing of this
tag. On the other hand, I can see it being quite possible this is going
to throw some routing programs for a loop when "avoid tolls" is selected.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] weeklyOSM #334 06/12/2016-12/12/2016

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 12/18/2016 03:04 AM, weeklyteam wrote:
> The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 334,
> is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
> happening in the openstreetmap world:
> 
> http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/8472/

When I just retrieved it, there was no English version, I got what
appears to be Spanish.

-- 
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

Re: [Talk-us] Deleting / Closing / Renaming all places in a chain

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 21:01 +, Elliott Plack wrote:
> Today, September 6, 2016, all ITT Tech campuses have closed due to a
> fallout with the federal government (read more:
> https://twitter.com/FOX59/status/773144554438524928 )

[...]

> Should we launch an automated edit, or some kind of batch process on
> OSM to clear the database `name=ITT Tech` (or similar) worldwide?
> Other online maps have begun removing ITT Tech locations from their
> directories. I do not know of a widely used method of closing a
> business on OSM other than deleting it. Personally, I think that
> collectively, as a community, we can turn these kind of news stories
> as a way to keep OSM fresh.

My understanding was that offices on the campuses will remain open while
they help the remaining students transfer elsewhere. I wouldn't go
deleting them until they have "for sale" or "for lease" signs posted on
them, or other similar signs that they are completely out of operation.
ITT Tech's website makes it clear they aren't taking any new students so
I think the impact on people being mistaken from seeing an ITT Tech
campus still "open" on OSM is minimal.

> On August 19, 2016, Apple Inc. rebranded all of their retail locations
> (FKA Apple Store) to simply, "Apple" (read
> more: http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/19/12537840/apple-store-rebranding ). 
> Further, some locations' storefront has no english text at all, just a 
> pictogram of an apple (the fruit). On their website, the naming convention 
> seems to be, "Apple [city name or mall name].

You are correct that the storefronts usually have no actual text, just
the logo. It's tricky to get this one right; personally, I think
name=Apple is the way to go, with the caveat that people will just have
to know the actual company offices are at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino,
CA, US, and not in hundreds of malls across the country. 

There is also have Domino's rebranding to get the "Pizza" out of its
name, and (local to Houston, TX, US) James Coney Island rebranding to
JCI Grill. The former, I am pretty sure is a done deal by now. On the
latter, I'm not sure if they are done rebranding chain-wide yet.

We also need to confirm any remaining Cookie Bouquet locations, as these
were supposed to have rebranded to Cookies By Design by now.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] Mappers in Idaho!

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 11:15 -0600, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Ahem. Teton County is in Wyoming not Idaho. This is emberrassing!

Actually, there is a Teton County, Idaho:

http://tetoncountyidaho.gov/



-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] Common names of highways do not match road signs.

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, 2016-07-10 at 12:07 -0400, Kevin Morgan wrote:
> Here is an idea. An additional tag is added called signage. The tag
> use the following format  name;ref;text. Each item is added to the tag
> if the information is in clued on road signs. The tag has the
> following sub tags color, icon, description, direction and text. The
> text sub tag is used to add additional text that is not a part of the
> name or ref. For example the city a road way leads to often include on
> a road sign. Description is for descriptive information that needs to
> be interpreted by a person rather map generation software. Direction
> is north,south, east,west. 

I would prefer signed:name, signed:ref, signed:icon, signed:destination,
signed:text. This is much more flexible than a tag that has three
components that must be supplied in order.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Slack

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 10:36 +0300, Rihards wrote:
> this might be a bit of a clash of "why are we mapping" reasons.
> for some people means are not important.
> for others, osm is one bit in a more open, collaborating world.
> 
> osm using slack is like wikipedia using google maps. because they are 
> more shiny, you know. and probably work better on iphones.

Last I checked, Wikipedia is usually linking coordinates to Geohack
which in turn allows the user to select the mapping service of his/her
choice. One of which, not surprisingly, happens to be OSM.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Slack

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, 2016-03-27 at 00:07 -0700, Steve Coast wrote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slack_(software)

And on this page:

> License   Proprietary

Until and unless there is an alternative client that is free software
(ideally GPL licensed, but BSD/MIT licensed would also be okay), I would
prefer to stick with IRC or its successor.

I feel it is contrary to the mission of OSM to directly support
proprietary licensed software. (Why do you think I'm mapping on OSM and
not fixing problems on Google Maps?)

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2016-03-24 at 13:59 -0700, Alan McConchie wrote:
> It's true that the first comments on our changesets came 5 months ago,
> but in our defense, we haven't been tagging any additional social_path
> features since that time. We had always intended to seek input from
> the community to make this tag an officially recognized one, or to
> come up with an alternative solution. We were mindful that we didn't
> want to do a lot of editing before talking to the community, which is
> why we didn't do any further editing. In that sense, please think of
> those 17 features as an experiment to feed into the discussion that
> we're all having now.

I oppose the use of highway=social_path. There are better ways to
accomplish the same thing without breaking existing applications.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] users cam98 and cameronk1998 causing issues around austin

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, 2016-01-24 at 07:34 +0200, Rihards wrote:
> these two new useraccounts seem to be used by the same person :
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/cam98
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/cameronk1998

This may well be the same user as an account named Cam4rd98, which I
remember causing trouble in the past as well.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] Papa John's Delivery Boundary in OSM

[Shawn K. Quinn]

If it really is a pizza restaurant's delivery boundary, then it should just be 
deleted. Is there anything to indicate it might actually be something 
else? Original message From: Elliott Plack 
 Date: 2015/12/24  20:20  (GMT-06:00) To: 
talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-us] Papa John's Delivery Boundary in 
OSM 
I'm not exactly sure what this is, but it is certainly and odd boundary. The 
name since V1 is Papa Johns #2997. I wonder if it is actually a CDP or maybe 
something that got merged incorrectly somehow. Any thoughts?
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Current Texas State Highway ref is incorrect

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2015-11-05 at 18:47 -0600, Sam Iacullo wrote:
> The current setup for Texas State Highway ref tagging
> (See:http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Texas) 
> There has already been some discussion as to what exists on the map 
> (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2014-September/013604.html),
>  but this was based on the majority of relations being incorrectly added into 
> OSM. As per the Texas Department of Transportation, the ref should be "ref=SH 
> ##" instead of the current "ref=TX ##". 
[...]

> If there is no opposition to correcting this tagging error, I will
> change the appropriate page over. 

Consider this opposition. The majority of states seem to be using the
postal abbreviation for state highways. There are only a few that don't
or that only use a single letter (Kansas and Michigan come to mind).

More meaning is evident in "LA 8 becomes TX 63" (oh, we're crossing into
Texas) as opposed to "SH 8 becomes SH 63" (what, the highway department
can't make up their mind?). Also, seeing "TX 63" or "LA 8" makes it a
bit easier to figure out exactly what state highway shields I should be
looking for. (A pet peeve of mine are directions that just treat highway
numbers as one and the same. When I give directions, I always specify
I-10, Texas 288, US 59, FM 1960, LA 12, etc. so there is no ambiguity.
Maybe I am the odd one out though...)

Changing back to "SH xxx" is a huge step backwards and I don't see any
good reason for it.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] Find missing roads

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 15:11 +, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi all, 
> 
> 
> Our OSM team cooked up something new. A missing roads plugin for JOSM.
> I think it's pretty nice but I would really like to hear what you
> think. 
> 
> 
> You can read some more about it on my diary
> (http://bit.ly/missingroads) but it's basically what it says on the
> tin. The plugin will show where we think roads are missing from OSM
> based on GPS data so you can add them :)
> 
> 
> Take it for a spin and let me know what you think, what we could
> improve, or just if you like it!

First observations:

I had to use the browser first instead of hunting for an area in JOSM.
Once I did, I noticed most tiles only showed part of a road, not the
whole thing.

The JOSM plugin really should allow selections of multiple types instead
of restricting one to parking *or* roads *or mixed.

That said, I see the potential for this to be very useful. I added a
couple of roads with it in the Houston, TX, area already.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com>


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

Re: [Talk-us] README tag with editor support

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 13:27 -0400, Richard Welty wrote:
 so i have two things in mind here:
 
 1) formalize the README tag as a way to caution future mappers
 
 2) request editor support, when someone goes to change a
 README tagged entity, it would be nice if editors would popup
 a dialog saying something along the lines of
 
 Warning: read the following before making any changes to this
 object README text follows

The only improvement I can suggest is to add an optional but recommended
README:date with a date in ISO 8601 format, or some other way of dating
the README tag on an object. We should also work on standardizing a way
of date-stamping imagery going forward; as stated elsewhere Bing does
this already, but Bing is not the alpha and omega of aerial photography.

Another possibility that goes along with this would be for editors to
support highlighting cases where the changes are known to post-date the
aerial photography by a significant amount of time. Also, I don't see
anything in the terms of use for Bing's imagery that prohibit us from
marking specific tiles as out-of-date based on our data. Did I miss
something?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Deletion rampage by a certain user

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Mon, 2015-05-18 at 22:51 +, Clay Smalley wrote:

 
 [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cam4rd98
 [2] http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~clay/deletions.html

Missing from this list is
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/29727822 which breaks TX 99 near
US 290. I just now found this today. (with help from someone on IRC)

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Deletion rampage by a certain user

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 20:27 +, Clay Smalley wrote:
 That is in fact on the list, and it's actually the changeset that I
 reverted.
 
Indeed it is, I'm going cross-eyed from looking at changeset numbers. My
apologies.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Deletion rampage by a certain user

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 08:04 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
 I'm comfortable executing this but I love exact specifications:
 Undelete everything deleted by user U since time T unless the object
 was also created by U would work.

That works for me, but I really would like to see a clarification from
Cam4rd98 on what exactly he intended to delete and why. Also, he was
asked nicely in a previous block message to use changeset comments
(publicly visible) and is still not doing so (also publicly visible). I
don't think asking nicely was enough. If we were able to look at his
changeset comments and see withdraw additions tainted by Google data
or similar, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion right now.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Deletion rampage by a certain user

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 17:24 +, Clay Smalley wrote:
 I disagree. In this group of changesets, he has deleted things that
 were not added by himself. He deleted my own original work that I
 surveyed and traced. And I'm baffled as to why.

We would have at least had some idea what was going through his head.
Maybe he thought they were ones he added. With a comment we'd know it
was an honest mistake and not retaliatory vandalism.

 I do agree that he needs to comment his changesets. This would save me
 quite a lot of frustration.

I think I've only left changesets uncommented less than 10 times out of
around 5600. Some of those were in the early days when I barely had a
clue what I was doing in Potlatch.

 In good faith, I'm going to go ahead and undelete all the
 neighborhoods that I mapped out in Katy. I can't say anything about
 the other areas where he deleted things - looks like we need to
 investigate more on that.

Good idea, and we definitely do.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Misspelled names

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 16:13 -0600, Mike Henson wrote:

 I am still having issues with Sonic (http://www.sonicdrivein.com/)
 
 people use SONIC, Sonic or Sonic Drive-in on OSM. The website is no
 help because they also use all 3 names... Is there a consensus on
 Sonic?

I use Sonic, no caps, and no Drive-in. At least one location in
Houston is drive-thru only; Sonic also had a food court location in
Willowbrook Mall for a while.

 I am also having an issue with Walmart, should it be a Marketplace,
 Supermarket, Department store??? All 3 are used in OSM in Oklahoma.

It should be the same as Target with a grocery store, unless it's a
Walmart Neighborhood Market which is clearly just shop=supermarket.
The last Walmart I tagged was shop=department_store but it probably
should be shop=department_store;supermarket instead.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com




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

[Talk-us] Edits near Lexington, KY?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

Does anyone know anything about a school course (middle or high school
most likely) incorporating OSM in or near Lexington, KY? I saw one
changeset comment mentioning something about extra credit but not
mentioning what the edit actually was. In addition I cleaned up plenty
of vandalism: a road on top of another road labeled Short cut to
school, three exclamation marks added to a street name, undeleted a
fire hydrant (!), and a couple of other things that I'm drawing a blank
on right now.

While I support OSM-related lessons in the classroom on general
principle, but I have to wonder if some of the garbage edits that come
with it offset the good edits. And to put it bluntly, the higher the
grade level this is coming from, the more disappointed I will be
regarding our public education system in 2014.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/history#map=13/38.0462/-84.4885

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] State highway refs (was Re: New I.D Feature)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 22:21 -0800, Minh Nguyen wrote:
 Do any routing engines currently care about prefixes on way refs?
 
  From what I've seen so far, most of the map styles that use the ref tag 
 to distinguish route networks will recognize either the state 
 abbreviation, SR, or SH. Some renderers use the prefix to choose a 
 state-specific shield, assuming any unrecognized prefix is for a county 
 route (white rectangle at higher zoom levels). MapQuest only recognizes 
 state/provincial abbreviations. Not that we should place too much stock 
 in individual renderer decisions. :-)

OSRM doesn't know that, for example, TX 6 and SH 6 are the same highway.
Once upon a time, I'd get directions that had things in them like:

Turn right on TX 6
Continue on SH 6
Continue on TX 6
Continue on SH 6
Continue on TX 6 ... etc

Granted, OSRM still doesn't handle it gracefully when another highway
multiplexes for a stretch, but at least one might be able to figure out
which highway one's supposed to stay on when it's ref'd the same across
the board. When it's not, it becomes much trickier.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Directional suffixes on roads: yes or no?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 22:43 -0600, John F. Eldredge wrote:
 An additional complication is ring-roads, which are likely to have XXX 
 North transition into XXX East, etc.

In Houston, it gets even weirder, going clockwise around the I-610
feeder roads:

North Loop West, North Loop East, East Loop North, East Loop South,
South Loop East, South Loop West, West Loop South, and then West Loop
North.

A similar situation exists for Beltway 8 and its Sam Houston Parkway
addresses. Since Grand Parkway is far enough out that most of it is
outside Harris County much less Houston, this may or may not be an issue
there depending on how they decide to assign addresses along it.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] User randomly adding speed limits across the US

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Tue, 2014-11-11 at 00:51 -0500, James Mast wrote:
 Heck, it could even lead to bad press if somebody gets a speeding
 ticket and they try to blame OSM for it because of the incorrect speed
 limit in the database.

No decent motorist has any excuse for trusting OSM data over the numbers
on the speed limit signs.


-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

[Talk-us] State highway refs (was Re: New I.D Feature)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 03:56 -0500, James Mast wrote:
 Just wanted to throw this out there in case you guys have forgoten,
 but we also use the two letter abbreviation in almost all relations
 for highways in the USA (however, there are a few that do spell out
 the state).

There are still a few places that use a convention like SH 123, SR 123,
or even (horrors) just 123 by itself to denote a state highway.
Currently, I refrain from making changes of this sort if it appears most
of a state uses this convention.

So, a couple of questions:

1. What, exactly, is fair game to change to a state abbreviation
reference?
2. Which states spell out the name in the ref?

I know Kansas uses K-123, and Michigan uses M-123. Are there any others
to be careful of?


-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-11-06 at 21:10 +, Elliott Plack wrote:
 Interesting about the Buck Act, however, the only info I could find
 about this oddity is from some websites written by conspiracy
 theorists, anti-government types, etc. Still, it would be in keeping
 with our practice of discouraging the use of abbreviations elsewhere
 in addresses. It would be very easy for a machine or renderer to
 abbreviate full state names down to USPS postal abbreviations, AP
 style guide abbreviations, or any other custom abbreviation.

In the case of US state and Canadian province abbreviations, there is a
1:1 correspondence with no ambiguity. Elsewhere this may or may not be
the case. That said, using the USPS abbreviations in the US makes the
most sense to me, as that is the format most of us who mail things with
any regularity are used to writing and seeing addresses in. I realize
it's an exception to the don't abbreviate rule but it does make some
sense at least to me.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 04:17 +, Elliott Plack wrote:
 Before the state showed up in iD, I had assumed someone could just
 easily derive the US state from the postal code. 

Usually, yes, but that introduces a dependence on third party data
(USPS) that really should not be there. That, and it can be cumbersome.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 08:42 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
 Is this really vandalism or a user that wanted to add her/his company
 to the map (o.a. for advertising purposes) and accidentally selected
 the street instead of the building ?

I fixed it. The comment I put on the changeset calls it vandalism, as
the user changed a street to advertise their business. It may be
unintentional but the change had what amounted to a vandalistic effect.


-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 09:14 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
 In this case I don't mind, the user made only one edit with the
 purpose of advertising a business.
 
 
  But imaging what the effect would be when you make your first edit in
 OSM, and are immediately called vandal. Would you continue editing ? I
 doubt so.
 IMHO The best solution in such a case is first contact the mapper and
 friendly point out that he/she made a mistake. That it is simply to
 correct this. Suggest how it can be fixed.
 Immediately start yelling vandalism and contacting the DWR for such a
 small issue is an overkill and turns aways new mappers.

I agree the DWG shouldn't be contacted over one edit, whether a user's
first edit or not. However there's still a net effect of vandalism for
the users who were looking for the original street name. I agree it
probably was not intentional.

Even if made to the correct object, there appeared to be ad-copy-like
text in this edit. Do we not already have a rule against that
specifically?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
 Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
 I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
 concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
 definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
 newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
 and offering to help?

I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Highly suspicious edit

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sat, May 17, 2014, at 03:44 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
  From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] 
  Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 12:02 AM
  To: t...@openstreetmap.org; OpenStreetMap talk-us list
  Subject: [OSM-talk] Highly suspicious edit
 
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22382959
 
  osmbot on #osm-us brought this up; I seriously doubt there's 
  a legitimate reason behind creating an alt explicitly created 
  for vandalism.
 
 Reverted and http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/468

It's obvious to me the entire login was created just for anonymous
vandalism; why not just block it permanently with a note inviting the
user to contact you under his/her *real* login?

I see no good reason to have a username Delete Mine And I Delete
Yours. I think it goes against the spirit of OSM as being overly
confrontational on its face.

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Oklahoma State Highway 18A

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, Apr 13, 2014, at 06:48 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
 I can't seem to locate this highway except where it starts on an OklaDOT
 map near the Chickasaw National Recreation Area.  Does anybody have any
 idea how far it goes or where it connects to the rest of the state
 highway
 system?  This one's got me legitimately feeling stupid given I was able
 to
 find SH-12...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickasaw_National_Recreation_Area
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Chickasaw_National_Recreation_Area.jpg

OK 18A does not connect to the state highway system, only to US 177
which at one time *used* to be OK 18.

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Why we really don't get new users

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014, at 01:17 PM, o...@charles.derkarl.org wrote:
 
 I'm going to just point out the elephant in the room here. I don't think
 any normal user cares about the license at all. I think the actual reason its
 hard to get new mappers, especially those that are not nerdy and obsessive
 like myself is that *the ontology sucks*. There, I said it, so you don't have
 to.
 
 It's actually a few things related to how the ontology sucks:
 
 1. The tagging of things bears little resemblance to things in the real
 world:
   a. A lot of common things just don't have standard tags: examples: tax 
 preparers like HR Block, investment brokers like Charles Schwab, medical 
 marijuana despensers here in California, recreational MJ shops in
 Colorado. I 
 could go on. 
   b. the whole shop/amenity debate
   c. common things that have really stupid tags, like barber shops

a. The pot shops need to be standardized, one way or another. I can see
different tagging for recreational versus medical but either way, I'd
like to see us standardize on something for each and be done with it.
b. Not well versed on this one...
c. If they are really stupid, we should either find something better, or
if there is nothing better just stick with what we have with a note to
the effect of we know this is stupid.

 2. To be a useful mapper, one needs to memorize these arbitrary tags. It 
 wouldn't be so hard if it weren't arbitrary (a salon is a shop? and it's 
 called a hairdresser‽). But even if it weren't arbitrary, it'd still be
 hard to remember because things have synonyms, and no shop is called a chemist
 in the US.

That's where editors like iD come in that remember the idiosyncratic
cases for you. Or at least, that's what I thought that feature of iD was
for. I find the UK-centric terminology a bit annoying as well but I've
learned to deal with it.

 Corrolary: A bagel shop is a bagel shop, no muggle cares that a bagel
 shop is fast_food amenity that sells the bagel cuisine.

shop=bagel you mean?

I don't really like this one, I would prefer amenity=cafe (or
amenity=fast_food) and cuisine=bagel myself.

 3. I went to a shop recently that sells espresso drinks, and gelato, but 
 markets itself as a chocolate maker. (Specifically: Snake  Butterfly,
 Campbell, CA). There is absolutely no sane way to tag this in OSM today.

amenity=cafe
cuisine=coffee_shop;ice_cream
shop=chocolate

That's the best I can think of. Yes, it's a bit ugly.

 4. The wiki is a terrible platform for documenting the ontology because
 it's not machine readable and it's just a slow way to get information.

What do you propose we replace it with?

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] State ref tags on ways: Use of unique ISO/ANSI/USPS 2-letter state codes in RELATIONS as well as WAYS?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014, at 06:04 PM, Peter Davies wrote:
 Texas also has many weird qualifiers on minor state routes but as I've
 never contracted there for 511 I'm not totally familiar with them.

Weird is a matter of opinion, but I only know of Farm Road (FM), Ranch
Road (RM or RR), Park Road (PR), the one-off NASA Road 1 (which I can
concede is a bit unusual), the semi-standard Spur and Loop, and normal
state highway. Am I missing any?

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] OSM Data Consumer

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014, at 08:23 PM, Mike N wrote:
 It's always a shock to find anyone using OSM maps and I'm staring at 
 some data I've worked on.   A regional gas station chain uses OSM in its 
 location maps:
 
 http://www.quiktrip.com/
 
(An example ZIP would be 29301 in Location if the map doesn't come up)

Nice. I might have to swing by one of these if I'm in the DFW area
anytime soon. Unfortunately they appear to have zippo in Houston.

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposal to Remove Two Duplicate Route Relations in Texas

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014, at 06:19 PM, Kam, Kristen -(p) wrote:
 Hello,
 
 I am writing in regards to the highway route relations representing US 59
 and US 281 in the state of Texas.
 
 For US Highway 59, I edited route relation 71232
 (http://osm.org/relation/71232). After editing said relation
 (1475243;http://www.osm.org/relation/1475243), I noticed there is a
 relation that has members that are also members to 71232.  Relation
 1475243 is essentially a duplicate of 71232 and I would like to delete
 this relation from the database. I contacted a user (Cam4rd98) who
 previously edited 1475243 and mentioned the action the subject to
 him/her. To date, I have not received a response. Instead of following up
 with the user it was suggested to me that I ought to message the list.
 Therefore I am proposing to you all the removal of relation 1475243.
 
 In addition, I would like to remove relation 1475274
 (http://www.osm.org/relation/1475274) because its members are also
 members of relation 1628532 (http://www.osm.org/relation/ 1628532) and
 thus is a duplicate.
 
 Does anyone object to my proposal to remove both relations?

I don't think Cam4rd98 is still an active mapper.

If you are absolutely, positively sure they are duplicates, I say go
ahead and prune.

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Prioritizing multi-banded route designators (multiple overlaps) on ways: the Principal route designator concept

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Peter Davies wrote:
 The question is how to handle US roadway routes that are double, triple
 or
 even quad-banded, having multiple route designators.  Some OSM mappers
 call
 this topic route overlaps.  I might call it information overload. On
 most maps, renderers simply show ALL the shields. But is it helpful to
 have
 roads peppered with conflicting information about the route number?  Who
 gains by knowing that Western Avenue, Augusta, Maine is US 202, ME 11, ME
 17 and ME 100?  Isn't this really confusing and unhelpful for most map
 users?

I find these helpful when giving directions. Follow Texas 6, which will
involve exiting the freeway and turning right / turning left and getting
on the freeway. (Part of US 290 in northwest Harris County is also
signed Texas 6.) Stay on US 290, which will involve a cloverleaf exit
ramp when leaving Brenham. (US 290 and Texas 36 are both signed on this
one particular stretch of road.) etc.

What appear to be rubbish numbers are useful to those following those
numbered routes.
 
 Now, if it's confusing on a map, just think how confusing it is in a
 navigation system or a traffic event info system.  Look out for a crash
 on US 202 eastbound / ME 11 northbound / ME 17 northbound / ME 100 eastbound
 (Western Avenue) in Augusta.  We need to know which route designator is
 the most important one, and to use mainly or only that one when talking
 to drivers.

In some cases it's not obvious *if* there is a primary route designator.
A lot of the time, to me, the primary designator will be the highway I'm
following, or the highway the recipient of my directions should be
following. I will admit the locals prefer to call it US 290 in the
former case, but the latter is a bit more ambiguous, as is the overlap
of Texas 71 and Texas 21 near Bastrop.

I'm guessing in your case US 202 is probably what you're calling the
primary. A navigation or traffic event info system might be able to make
an intelligent announcement based on the most likely numbered route that
one is following. I certainly wouldn't want to hear *just* US 202 in
that announcement, though, and think oh, I'm not taking that route I'm
taking ME 17 -- oh, that's right, there's this one block of overlap, so
maybe I am taking US 202.

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Ferries

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013, at 06:30 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
 I disagree that we are making one-off change. What we are doing is making
 the map more useful. When adding an access ramp to a motorway we call it
 a motorway link. The waiting area for ferries is a similar feature of a
 ferry route. It certainly isn't a service road except in a broad sense. There
 was agreement to tag the service=ferry to solve the problem. That wasn't my
 first choice but it works.

How about highway=ferry_link then?

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013, at 02:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
 The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass direction
 of the road.

However, in some cases the directions change as the highway goes on,
especially for loops: I-610 in Houston, Texas, changes from north/south
to east/west to south/north to west/east as you go around. (Same for
Beltway 8/Sam Houston Tollway, for that matter.)

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Interstate 64 and its spur interstates (I-64, I-264, I-464) changed to primary status in Virginia Beach, VA

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sat, Aug 3, 2013, at 09:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 
 
 Il giorno 03/ago/2013, alle ore 16:14, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com ha
 scritto:
 
  Lots of deletes:
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16855560
 
 
 besides writing to the mapper (what should definitely be done, in a
 polite way), when there are lots of deletes it is better to revert the
 changesets ASAP (and inform the mapper about it in your message) instead
 of waiting because the longer you wait the more conflicts will be to
 resolve afterwards (of course given that the deletes don't make sense).

Martin, can you go ahead and do this for the more flagrantly vandalizing
changes? If not, is there someone who can?

Also, shouldn't the mapper in question have been at least temporarily
blocked pending investigation by now?

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Shields are up!

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, Jul 28, 2013, at 10:38 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
 We finally managed to get Phil's highway shield rendering up on the
 OSM-US
 server today! You can see the tiles here:
 
 http://tile.openstreetmap.us/osmus_shields/preview.html
 
 This is a pretty basic preview for now. I'll look at getting the tiles
 set
 up in a pretty leaflet UI or something.
 
 Toby

Most of them look pretty good. The Texas FM/RM road shields need work
though (missing the black backgrounds), and I'm assuming Louisiana
shields aren't done yet?

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Trunk vs motorway for rural Interstates with grade crossings

[Shawn K. Quinn]

As an example of what I am referring to:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/145137749/history

I noticed that most of these were recently changed back to motorway. Is
this the consensus of the community at large that these should be
motorway, or should any section with grade crossings be trunk?

I'm slightly in favor of keeping the change back to motorway, but am
willing to go along with a clear consensus either way.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Turn restriction dispute

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 18:22 -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
 The point behind turn restrictions is that a routing algorithm is
 going to be looking for them to create a route.

And I think this is enough reason that the turn restriction should stay;
I wouldn't want directions to include it and I doubt most of the users
would either. Remember, garbage in, garbage out (GIGO).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] flyers / brochures

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 13:29 -0500, Toby Murray wrote:
 Well it does prominently talk about the CC license which won't be
 accurate in another couple of weeks. I also see osmarender on the
 globe which doesn't exist any more and the old style logo... but those
 are pretty minor things. The license bit would be the biggest thing
 that should probably be updated if a new batch is being printed.

Osmarender still exists, just has not been maintained in a little while.
The license definitely needs to be updated, also the maps of NYC and
London should be refreshed with current data just to be sure.


-- 
Shawn K. Quinn - skqu...@rushpost.com - +1.832.533.0606
http://www.spectacularshawn.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Post bot cleanup

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 00:42 -0500, Toby Murray wrote:
 Any other common problems that people have seen?

This looks like Preston Road in Dallas, TX, is messed up:
http://osm.org/go/Tt5Z2UZM--

Possible damage to I-35/Kansas Turnpike in Kansas:
http://map.project-osrm.org/Xg

As a sidenote OSRM may be a big help to find problems, especially if one
can compare with an expected route between two points.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2012-07-07

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 08:43 -0700, Kenneth Adelman wrote:
  [quoting Dave Hansen:]
  I'm seeing the same thing.
 
  Any suggestions for other trackers to use?
 
 Not an expert on the matter, but try
 
 http://publicbt.com/
 
 I think you can have more than one, so you could leave the current 
 tracker and add
 this one. If you update the .torrent files on the site, let me know and I'll 
 try the
 new ones.

These are all known to work:

udp://tracker.publicbt.com:80
udp://tracker.ccc.de:80
udp://tracker.istole.it:80

Any modern BitTorrent client should have no issue with multiple
trackers. Any modern BitTorrent client will also support DHT, PEX, and
magnet links making a missing tracker an annoyance rather than a
show-stopper; though it is possible to download public torrents given
only the info hash, having a tracker can (and usually does) speed things
up.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] An amusing story of a GNIS entry

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 06:49 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
 http://www.fuzzyworld3.com/3um/viewtopic.php?f=29t=3183
 
 I suppose the question is whether OSM should have this place
 (assuming 
 someone verifies that the sign is gone). Currently it does as part of 
 the GNIS import:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/153418203/history 

I don't see the harm in leaving it in, especially after reading the
story about it.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Huffmeister Road near Cypress, TX

[Shawn K. Quinn]

Anyone know why a huge chunk of Huffmeister Road near Cypress, Texas
(US) is now missing? I have had no luck looking through the past
changesets to see what happened and neither has anyone on IRC when I've
asked.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Abbreviation expansion - USS to United States Ship?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:33 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
 Is this a good idea? It looks really odd to me: 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/9061339

I agree that it looks odd. Expand Drive perhaps, but expanding all of
it looks rather awkward.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us