Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Aren't these canals/drains/etc and not tracks? In any case I would suggest concentrating on OSM and not on what google has/or not. Most of google data is simply purchased when they feel a need to do so (for example like in Germany two years ago when they where so hopelessly behind OSM that they had to do something) and not a good yardstick for anything. Simon Am 22.09.2014 11:02, schrieb Sylvain Maillard: Hi, in France we also have some tools to show/compare with external datasets. One of them is regarding the highways (http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=15lat=45.73849lon=4.83066layers=000BTFF) but I find it way more readable than yours with google data (http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=45.73829lon=4.82987layers=BT00) ... perhaps can you add more color/shape to help to categorize the differences : absent / not a major / not a minor / ... ? There is also an other place whith something strange : OSM is really missing a lot of road/tracks, google is showing them (not sure about the exact classification), but the compare tool didn't show the differences ... - on google : https://www.google.fr/maps/@43.5091406,4.6686206,18z - on osm : http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/43.50847/4.66676 - on compare tool : http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=43.5091lon=4.66833layers=BT00 Sylvain 2014-09-21 14:57 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com: Il giorno 20/set/2014, alle ore 21:10, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com mailto:j...@jfeldredge.com ha scritto: So, you feel that any road which isn't classified as highway=residential, highway=service, or highway=track is a major road? I agree that the term major is relative, to me this would be secondary (or even primary) and up, but from unclassified upwards that's all connection roads. cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
For my last question, I get the answer in the first email of this thread : Currently it compares major highways (unclassified and higher) and water features = tracks are not (yet) compared ! I don't want to focus work where google has buy data, it was more a test for this new tool ... These are real tracks, but in a private natural reserve, and part of them are flooded several month in a year ... I worked at that place, but there is so much other things to do with more value for the community that I still didn't take the time to map the tracks where almost nobody is autorized to go ... but it's on my todo list ;) cheers, Sylvain 2014-09-23 8:05 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: Aren't these canals/drains/etc and not tracks? In any case I would suggest concentrating on OSM and not on what google has/or not. Most of google data is simply purchased when they feel a need to do so (for example like in Germany two years ago when they where so hopelessly behind OSM that they had to do something) and not a good yardstick for anything. Simon Am 22.09.2014 11:02, schrieb Sylvain Maillard: Hi, in France we also have some tools to show/compare with external datasets. One of them is regarding the highways ( http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=15lat=45.73849lon=4.83066layers=000BTFF ) but I find it way more readable than yours with google data ( http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=45.73829lon=4.82987layers=BT00 ) ... perhaps can you add more color/shape to help to categorize the differences : absent / not a major / not a minor / ... ? There is also an other place whith something strange : OSM is really missing a lot of road/tracks, google is showing them (not sure about the exact classification), but the compare tool didn't show the differences ... - on google : https://www.google.fr/maps/@43.5091406,4.6686206,18z - on osm : http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/43.50847/4.66676 - on compare tool : http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=43.5091lon=4.66833layers=BT00 Sylvain ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Hi, in France we also have some tools to show/compare with external datasets. One of them is regarding the highways ( http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=15lat=45.73849lon=4.83066layers=000BTFF) but I find it way more readable than yours with google data ( http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=45.73829lon=4.82987layers=BT00) ... perhaps can you add more color/shape to help to categorize the differences : absent / not a major / not a minor / ... ? There is also an other place whith something strange : OSM is really missing a lot of road/tracks, google is showing them (not sure about the exact classification), but the compare tool didn't show the differences ... - on google : https://www.google.fr/maps/@43.5091406,4.6686206,18z - on osm : http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/43.50847/4.66676 - on compare tool : http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=43.5091lon=4.66833layers=BT00 Sylvain 2014-09-21 14:57 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: Il giorno 20/set/2014, alle ore 21:10, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com ha scritto: So, you feel that any road which isn't classified as highway=residential, highway=service, or highway=track is a major road? I agree that the term major is relative, to me this would be secondary (or even primary) and up, but from unclassified upwards that's all connection roads. 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] Visually detect missing roads
Il giorno 20/set/2014, alle ore 21:10, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com ha scritto: So, you feel that any road which isn't classified as highway=residential, highway=service, or highway=track is a major road? I agree that the term major is relative, to me this would be secondary (or even primary) and up, but from unclassified upwards that's all connection roads. cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 09/18/2014 11:07 AM, Stephan Knauss wrote: Dave F. writes: On 17/09/2014 23:30, Stephan Knauss wrote: In Google the road is listed as a major highway. Are you interpreting this data from Google's visual render or extracting it from their database? It's coming from their database. Google does expose a classification through the v3 API. My map does consider the road types arterial and highway as major and local as minor. For OSM data unclassified and higher is considered major. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk I think that calling a road tagged as highway=unclassified a major road is an overstatement. So, you feel that any road which isn't classified as highway=residential, highway=service, or highway=track is a major road? -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Am 20.09.2014 21:10, schrieb John F. Eldredge: On 09/18/2014 11:07 AM, Stephan Knauss wrote: Dave F. writes: On 17/09/2014 23:30, Stephan Knauss wrote: In Google the road is listed as a major highway. Are you interpreting this data from Google's visual render or extracting it from their database? It's coming from their database. Google does expose a classification through the v3 API. My map does consider the road types arterial and highway as major and local as minor. For OSM data unclassified and higher is considered major. I think that calling a road tagged as highway=unclassified a major road is an overstatement. So, you feel that any road which isn't classified as highway=residential, highway=service, or highway=track is a major road? +1 Thought the difference between unclassified and residential is often only the landuse surround it. We use unclassified in industrial and commercial areas plus outside of settlements and residential only within residential areas. cu colliar signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 17/09/2014 23:30, Stephan Knauss wrote: In Google the road is listed as a major highway. Are you interpreting this data from Google's visual render or extracting it from their database? Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Pieren writes: Strange, I don't see this on googleMaps from France. And this street is also a minor residential road in the official highway classification (IGN Route 500 - which is a souce we are allowed to use but is not mandatory for OSM). So this is another case in which Google data is incorrect. The tool can only compare. But it can't tell you whether OSM or Google is correct. It will only tell that there is a difference. Best would be to ignore this specific street and move on to the next difference. I understand that if you have enough of the Google problems they start to be annoying and hide the real problems. Do you have any idea on how to mark something like this as checked? It should be a lightweight solution, still not prone to accidental checking something as verified. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Dave F. writes: On 17/09/2014 23:30, Stephan Knauss wrote: In Google the road is listed as a major highway. Are you interpreting this data from Google's visual render or extracting it from their database? It's coming from their database. Google does expose a classification through the v3 API. My map does consider the road types arterial and highway as major and local as minor. For OSM data unclassified and higher is considered major. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 18/09/2014 17:07, Stephan Knauss wrote: It's coming from their database. Google does expose a classification through the v3 API. My map does consider the road types arterial and highway as major and local as minor. For OSM data unclassified and higher is considered major. OK. Ignoring that we're not meant to use Google data to amend OSM data, there's a strong case to say that you are, I'll still not be using your diff map: 1. Confusing to use. That it flashes whenever a user pans or zooms is irritating and that you need to repeatedly swap between renderings makes it highly non user friendly. 2. To validate any differences, only to find they're repeatedly Google problems is not a great use of my time. 3. I don't think your correlation of road classifications is accurate enough. Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Great tool! Found one canal that needed mapping in my area. I'm guessing this will be great for countries that are badly mapped, and you need to find quickly what areas need your attention. Janko 2014-09-18 18:48 GMT+02:00 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: On 18/09/2014 17:07, Stephan Knauss wrote: It's coming from their database. Google does expose a classification through the v3 API. My map does consider the road types arterial and highway as major and local as minor. For OSM data unclassified and higher is considered major. OK. Ignoring that we're not meant to use Google data to amend OSM data, there's a strong case to say that you are, I'll still not be using your diff map: 1. Confusing to use. That it flashes whenever a user pans or zooms is irritating and that you need to repeatedly swap between renderings makes it highly non user friendly. 2. To validate any differences, only to find they're repeatedly Google problems is not a great use of my time. 3. I don't think your correlation of road classifications is accurate enough. Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://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] Visually detect missing roads
Am 12.09.2014 23:02, schrieb Michael Kugelmann: Am 09.09.2014 09:22, schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: It would be useful to allow switching between diff, OSM only and google only. Currently in my area results are too confusing to be useful. +1, same to me... the cross added by Stepahn helped a lot for me. Thanks for this improvement! Best regards, Michael. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Salut Sylvain, On 16.09.2014 14:14, Sylvain Maillard wrote: I look at your map for Lyon, and don't understand most of the missing road that your tool is showing ... an example with http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=45.73417lon=4.82971layers=BT00F : the road is there in both maps and seems to have the same kind of attributes (oneway and classification). Can you explain why there is a big red mark on it ? When you have a closer look at the data you notice that in OSM the Rue Marcel Mérieux is classified as highway=residential. This is a minor road classification. In Google the road is listed as a major highway. As this is a difference it is marked as red (=different). I can't tell you which one is correct. This needs to be determined by the local mappers. There are different tagging schemes and ideas of how roads should be classified inside towns. Often this also differs depending on the country. I got feedback from mappers who use the tool in central Europe to detect possible tagging problems. But my focus for the tool was to detect real white spots on the map. Areas where major highways are completely missing. The best use of the compare tool is outside of big cities. Have a look at rural areas in Africa or Asia to get an impression on how useful it can be to complete the major road network there. Or French Guiana http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=45.73417lon=4.82971layers=BT00F Some areas might be more difficult to process than others. Consult Bing or alternative backgrounds like mapbox what could be a correct mapping. If you can't figure it out with a reasonable certainty, leave it as a job for future on the ground mappers or waiting for better imagery. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Hi, I look at your map for Lyon, and don't understand most of the missing road that your tool is showing ... an example with http://compare.osm-tools.org/?zoom=15lat=45.73417lon=4.82971layers=BT00F : the road is there in both maps and seems to have the same kind of attributes (oneway and classification). Can you explain why there is a big red mark on it ? cheers, Sylvain 2014-09-15 10:53 GMT+02:00 SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: On 15/09/2014 08:53, Stephan Knauss wrote: So actually a map with no diff is good. At least a good indication that the map is not missing something important. Assuming for a moment that Google data is a perfect reference (which is not as we all know). Unfortunately, we (as in all OSM users using QA sites) don't all know this. That's why I made the comment up the thread about Google (and actually also Apple) Maps showing a road locally to me that doesn't exist. There's an increasing problem with relatively inexperienced users* thinking that if a QA site no longer shows a problem, then the problem is fixed, and here it's compounded by saying a perfect map is grey. In reality of course you'd need to go there and have a look to make sure. Of course, sometimes you can't do that (the area's physically inaccessible, or far away and there are no local mappers available to fix a problem) and in those cases QA sites such as yours can be extremely useful. Other QA sites tend to make it clear what they're actually showing (e.g. musical chairs has in capital letters at the bottom of the screen THIS IS A LIST OF DISAGREEMENTS, NOT NECESSARILY OSM ERRORS. Clearly some sort of disclaimer text like that would make sense, but would it perhaps also be possible to guide new mappers towards other fixing options available, such as: o find a local mapper and contact them - even just to ask if (a) is correct and then (b), and then do the edit based on that. o where there are no local active mappers add a note that someone can see when they're next in the area requesting a survey. Cheers, Andy * actually, it's not just relatively inexperienced mappers. Recently in the UK we had someone inventing footpaths to join (arguably mistagged) highway=pedestrian islands to nearby roads. Just this morning we've had someone decided that the actual metal signs describing a road are clearly wrong when compared to what Ordnance Survey's open data says. ___ 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] Visually detect missing roads
On 15.09.2014 01:38, Dave F. wrote: On 14/09/2014 13:56, Stephan Knauss wrote: First and most important: It can't tell you which data is better. It just shows the differences. Then maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by: So in a perfect area the map would be grey. Hm, I think I understand. I should think of a better wording to explain it. perfect is not unambiguous so up to the interpretation of the user. It might also give the impression that Google map data is perfect. What I tried to explain is a problem I encountered when I showed the diff first. People said: why there is only a grey map in my area? So actually a map with no diff is good. At least a good indication that the map is not missing something important. Assuming for a moment that Google data is a perfect reference (which is not as we all know). I have to think a bit longer on how to explain why there is all grey. Especially in central Europe and US there are not that many major highways actually missing. East-Asia or Africa is a completely different story. Also Google accuracy varies much depending on their source. For clarification could you explain what you believe is inaccurate with this way: http://tinyurl.com/jwylzkb The South End Road is changing it's type from a major highway into a residential just before Bradfield Southend. A usual tagging in OSM is to continue the tagging of interconnect roads as such even inside villages until it joins with another interconnect. Compare it with The Avenue in Chapel Row a little to the west. So South End Road should most likely continue as a major highway until it connects to Common Hill. Same Marlston Road in Chapel Row. It should connect to The Avenue. As a side note: Is the spelling correct? There is a Southend village without space and in the road name it has a space. I genuinely believe we shouldn't be comparing OSM with Google. In so many ways the OSM database is far ahead of Google. You are absolutely right with this. Probably every mapper can tell areas where there are serious flaws with Google data. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 15/09/2014 08:53, Stephan Knauss wrote: So actually a map with no diff is good. At least a good indication that the map is not missing something important. Assuming for a moment that Google data is a perfect reference (which is not as we all know). Unfortunately, we (as in all OSM users using QA sites) don't all know this. That's why I made the comment up the thread about Google (and actually also Apple) Maps showing a road locally to me that doesn't exist. There's an increasing problem with relatively inexperienced users* thinking that if a QA site no longer shows a problem, then the problem is fixed, and here it's compounded by saying a perfect map is grey. In reality of course you'd need to go there and have a look to make sure. Of course, sometimes you can't do that (the area's physically inaccessible, or far away and there are no local mappers available to fix a problem) and in those cases QA sites such as yours can be extremely useful. Other QA sites tend to make it clear what they're actually showing (e.g. musical chairs has in capital letters at the bottom of the screen THIS IS A LIST OF DISAGREEMENTS, NOT NECESSARILY OSM ERRORS. Clearly some sort of disclaimer text like that would make sense, but would it perhaps also be possible to guide new mappers towards other fixing options available, such as: o find a local mapper and contact them - even just to ask if (a) is correct and then (b), and then do the edit based on that. o where there are no local active mappers add a note that someone can see when they're next in the area requesting a survey. Cheers, Andy * actually, it's not just relatively inexperienced mappers. Recently in the UK we had someone inventing footpaths to join (arguably mistagged) highway=pedestrian islands to nearby roads. Just this morning we've had someone decided that the actual metal signs describing a road are clearly wrong when compared to what Ordnance Survey's open data says. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Stephan Apart from being confusing to understand use, you're making the false assumption that it's the Google data which is correct. In my area the only red lines are either where Google maps are inaccurate or there's an error in your algorithm as there's no difference between OSM Google. Can't get the Bing overlay to work. David Fox On 09/09/2014 08:11, Stephan Knauss wrote: I did announce this on the German list last week. As the load did not cause the server to catch fire I'm now announcing it to a wider audience. I have created a map which visually diffs our data against Google Maps. Currently it compares major highways (unclassified and higher) and water features. The data is styled to show up in bright colors. If there is matching data in OSM it would hide the Google data. So in a perfect area the map would be grey. Differences stay visible. You can try it here: http://compare.osm-tools.org/ It has the possibility to directly load the visible area into the editors. More details can be found here: http://www.osm-tools.org/compare.html or if you're able to read German in my blog post at http://www.technologyblog.de/2014/08/wo-fehlen-bei-openstreetmap-noch-daten/ In well-mapped areas the differences are usually caused by OSM data not being tagged as a major highway. If you're looking for areas where roads are actually missing and can be drawn from aerials head over to Asia. Hope this helps all people interested in arm-chair mapping to focus on the major missing parts of OSM-data. If you pan the map fast you'll see the original Google data. This is caused by the way technical way the images are layered. When using Google API instead of OpenLayers it would not do this but caching of tiles is worse with Google. That's why I decided to use OL. Enjoy mapping! Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Hello Dave, On 14.09.2014 12:27, Dave F. wrote: Apart from being confusing to understand use, you're making the false assumption that it's the Google data which is correct. In my area the only red lines are either where Google maps are inaccurate or there's an error in your algorithm as there's no difference between OSM Google. sorry for causing confusion. What would be your idea of making it more clear on how to use it? Should I change the order of topics on the explanation page to have it closer to the beginning of the page? http://www.osm-tools.org/compare.html I could also display a pop-up similar to the one at the osm.org main page. But I found these a bit annoying as you have to always close them before being able to use the map. I'm not a native speaker. Could you suggest a better way of explaining this? I tried but maybe it's not as clear as I hoped it would be. It's this section: Things to consider -- There are a few things to consider when using this tool. First and most important: It can't tell you which data is better. It just shows the differences. It's up to the user to decide what to do. It could be that OSM is not tagging a major highway as such, it could be a problem with Google as well. Use common sense to judge or try contacting mappers on the ground. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 09.09.2014 09:22, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: It would be useful to allow switching between diff, OSM only and google only. Currently in my area results are too confusing to be useful. I have added a cross-hair to the center of the map. This should make it easier to focus on a specific feature when switching the maps. At least I hope so. You can toggle between the diff view, OSM and Bing (which would be the source for your additions). If it's not visible then you might have an old version in your cache. In this case please force a reload of http://compare.osm-tools.org/ Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 14/09/2014 13:56, Stephan Knauss wrote: Hello Dave, First and most important: It can't tell you which data is better. It just shows the differences. Then maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by: So in a perfect area the map would be grey. For clarification could you explain what you believe is inaccurate with this way: http://tinyurl.com/jwylzkb I genuinely believe we shouldn't be comparing OSM with Google. In so many ways the OSM database is far ahead of Google. Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de wrote: All these map-compare services including mine just point you to an area which needs more love. They are very within the bounds of the TOS of the individual services. Still seems like there would be a better way to do this, against public data sources like the USGS, which would be government data and thus fair game, without containing easter eggs. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Am 09.09.2014 09:22, schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: It would be useful to allow switching between diff, OSM only and google only. Currently in my area results are too confusing to be useful. +1, same to me... Cheers, Michael. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
All contributors should keep in mind the terms of service for Google maps, OSM, and copyright laws in general. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_Easter_Eggs ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
Hello Bryce, On 11.09.2014 08:26, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: All contributors should keep in mind the terms of service for Google maps, OSM, and copyright laws in general. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_Easter_Eggs This is one of the general rules in OSM that we don't copy from other maps. All these map-compare services including mine just point you to an area which needs more love. They are very within the bounds of the TOS of the individual services. The actual data is coming from a different source. With the availability of Bing and Mapbox aerial (satellite) imagery in these days mostly from them. Still GPS tracks are quite useful as well. The editors do contain special code to prevent you from loading for example google maps into the editor to copy from them. The API does as well deliver a blacklist of sources not allowed to trace from so the list can be centrally maintained. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
On 09.09.2014 09:22, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: It would be useful to allow switching between diff, OSM only and google only. Currently in my area results are too confusing to be useful. compare.osm-tools.org does focus on highlighting the missing roads and water features. If your area is still too confusing on the high zoom level then just starting to map the major highways as visible on aerial imageries is a good way to make the comparison map less dense. For directly comparing the full map rendering better use a map with a slider design like this: http://comparemaps.drona.ro/ My idea was to be able to give you a quick overview of missing roads. Check out Thailand and compare to Vietnam to get the idea. I actively decided against a slider layout. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
I did announce this on the German list last week. As the load did not cause the server to catch fire I'm now announcing it to a wider audience. I have created a map which visually diffs our data against Google Maps. Currently it compares major highways (unclassified and higher) and water features. The data is styled to show up in bright colors. If there is matching data in OSM it would hide the Google data. So in a perfect area the map would be grey. Differences stay visible. You can try it here: http://compare.osm-tools.org/ It has the possibility to directly load the visible area into the editors. More details can be found here: http://www.osm-tools.org/compare.html or if you're able to read German in my blog post at http://www.technologyblog.de/2014/08/wo-fehlen-bei-openstreetmap-noch-daten/ In well-mapped areas the differences are usually caused by OSM data not being tagged as a major highway. If you're looking for areas where roads are actually missing and can be drawn from aerials head over to Asia. Hope this helps all people interested in arm-chair mapping to focus on the major missing parts of OSM-data. If you pan the map fast you'll see the original Google data. This is caused by the way technical way the images are layered. When using Google API instead of OpenLayers it would not do this but caching of tiles is worse with Google. That's why I decided to use OL. Enjoy mapping! Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Visually detect missing roads
It would be useful to allow switching between diff, OSM only and google only. Currently in my area results are too confusing to be useful. 2014-09-09 9:11 GMT+02:00 Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de: I did announce this on the German list last week. As the load did not cause the server to catch fire I'm now announcing it to a wider audience. I have created a map which visually diffs our data against Google Maps. Currently it compares major highways (unclassified and higher) and water features. The data is styled to show up in bright colors. If there is matching data in OSM it would hide the Google data. So in a perfect area the map would be grey. Differences stay visible. You can try it here: http://compare.osm-tools.org/ It has the possibility to directly load the visible area into the editors. More details can be found here: http://www.osm-tools.org/compare.html or if you're able to read German in my blog post at http://www.technologyblog.de/2014/08/wo-fehlen-bei- openstreetmap-noch-daten/ In well-mapped areas the differences are usually caused by OSM data not being tagged as a major highway. If you're looking for areas where roads are actually missing and can be drawn from aerials head over to Asia. Hope this helps all people interested in arm-chair mapping to focus on the major missing parts of OSM-data. If you pan the map fast you'll see the original Google data. This is caused by the way technical way the images are layered. When using Google API instead of OpenLayers it would not do this but caching of tiles is worse with Google. That's why I decided to use OL. Enjoy mapping! Stephan ___ 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] Visually detect missing roads
On 09/09/2014 08:11, Stephan Knauss wrote: I have created a map which visually diffs our data against Google Maps. I can see how Google could find this useful locally to me - it would enable them to remove some of the roads on their map that don't exist, like the one to a coal mine that closed in 1957 :-) Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
