Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 16:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Tried a test message from an outside e-mail but doesn't seem to have come > through. > > Do you have to be subscribed to the list to be able to post to it? > Yes ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
Tried a test message from an outside e-mail but doesn't seem to have come through. Do you have to be subscribed to the list to be able to post to it? Thanks Graeme On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 15:02, Phil Wyatt wrote: > Lots of the detail is there already > > > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Cycling_and_Foot_Paths > > > > Never know, they might even get to like mapping and start adding lots more > detail like “operator” to existing tacks and notes to those under > rehabilitation > > > > Cheers - Phil > > > > *From:* Ben Kelley > *Sent:* Thursday, November 2, 2023 3:44 PM > *To:* OSM-Au > *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison > > > > In the context of the tracks, there is always the risk that if you delete > something that you don't think should be there, that someone else re-maps > it because they see it in the aerial photo. (As we discussed.) > > > > I guess the best is that we could detail a preferred approach (e.g. in > Australian tagging guidelines). I think it's clear that there are a number > of views on this though. > > > > Then at least if something happens that differs from the preferred > approach, it makes it clearer whether a revert is justified. > > > > - Ben. > > > > > > On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 14:57, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > DWG have received a > > "*Request for a Liaison Officer*: > > To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW > National Parks and Wildlife Service" > > > > This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously > requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) > > > > What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like > this - here / Forum / Discord? > > > > Question posed in all three places > > > > Thanks > > > > Graeme > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
Thanks everybody for your thoughts. As per Steve's comment, here is probably the easiest contact point due to not needing an account, but we'll see what other suggestions are made? I was wondering if a general OSM-AU / OSM-Oceania e-mail address, probably as part of OSGeo, would help with this sort of thing? Anyway, my message back to him for further details came back with an OOO till 21/11 (his query was from a few weeks ago) so we have some time to discuss it! His address also listed him being at Coffs Harbour, so I don't know if he's asking on a regional basis onl, or if that may be a main office? Thanks Graeme On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 14:48, Ben Kelley wrote: > In the context of the tracks, there is always the risk that if you delete > something that you don't think should be there, that someone else re-maps > it because they see it in the aerial photo. (As we discussed.) > > I guess the best is that we could detail a preferred approach (e.g. in > Australian tagging guidelines). I think it's clear that there are a number > of views on this though. > > Then at least if something happens that differs from the preferred > approach, it makes it clearer whether a revert is justified. > > - Ben. > > > On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 14:57, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > >> DWG have received a >> "*Request for a Liaison Officer*: >> To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW >> National Parks and Wildlife Service" >> >> This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously >> requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) >> >> What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like >> this - here / Forum / Discord? >> >> Question posed in all three places >> >> Thanks >> >> Graeme >> >> ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
Lots of the detail is there already https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Cycling_and_Foot_Paths Never know, they might even get to like mapping and start adding lots more detail like “operator” to existing tacks and notes to those under rehabilitation Cheers - Phil From: Ben Kelley Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2023 3:44 PM To: OSM-Au Subject: Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison In the context of the tracks, there is always the risk that if you delete something that you don't think should be there, that someone else re-maps it because they see it in the aerial photo. (As we discussed.) I guess the best is that we could detail a preferred approach (e.g. in Australian tagging guidelines). I think it's clear that there are a number of views on this though. Then at least if something happens that differs from the preferred approach, it makes it clearer whether a revert is justified. - Ben. On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 14:57, Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com> > wrote: DWG have received a "Request for a Liaison Officer: To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service" This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like this - here / Forum / Discord? Question posed in all three places Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
In the context of the tracks, there is always the risk that if you delete something that you don't think should be there, that someone else re-maps it because they see it in the aerial photo. (As we discussed.) I guess the best is that we could detail a preferred approach (e.g. in Australian tagging guidelines). I think it's clear that there are a number of views on this though. Then at least if something happens that differs from the preferred approach, it makes it clearer whether a revert is justified. - Ben. On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 14:57, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > DWG have received a > "*Request for a Liaison Officer*: > To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW > National Parks and Wildlife Service" > > This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously > requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) > > What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like > this - here / Forum / Discord? > > Question posed in all three places > > Thanks > > Graeme > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
Hi Folks, Personally I think its best if they do become editors as well as mailing/forum/discord participants. It's the best way to learn the ecosystem and I have no doubt that their data group will have some GIS knowledge etc so it wont be too onerous on them to participate. The difficulty is that it may take them 'ages' to get some higher level approval to be 'official' editors for the organisation. Not that this will mean anything to OSM mappers but government organisations like to keep control of what their employees do at a public level. I would also be happy to email/chat to them at any time. Cheers - Phil -Original Message- From: stevea Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2023 3:05 PM To: Graeme Fitzpatrick ; Kim Oldfield via Talk-au Subject: Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison My two cents. Our forum and Discord require "accounts" to be registered at the OSM level (via OAuth2 by registering for a volunteer Contributor account to OSM) and at "the Discord level," something else again. A mailing list "merely" requires an email address as an "account" to be registered with the talk-au mailing list, which could be argued (I begin, but offer nothing more than this assertion) that this is an "easier" (for "easiest" I add a ?) or at least "lower bar" and maybe "preferentially more anonymous" or "less privacy invasive" method, for those reasons. Registering on talk-au doesn't require agreeing to what we agree to to become Contributors, "merely" to join a "talking community" about "things Australia regarding OSM." By providing an email address and registering with a mailman account, that's both "low-bar" and "fairly sharply focused" at the same time. A great benefit are many relevant eyeballs who read the "contact us questions" which seem to have arisen. While I'm not, I could imaging myself as an IT person at a National P and reading the analysis above, nodding my head, agreeing that it isn't a very high bar to jump over to have a chat. And then, having a chat. > On Nov 1, 2023, at 8:52 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > DWG have received a > "Request for a Liaison Officer: > To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service" > > This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) > > What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like this - here / Forum / Discord? > > Question posed in all three places > > Thanks > > Graeme > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
My two cents. Our forum and Discord require "accounts" to be registered at the OSM level (via OAuth2 by registering for a volunteer Contributor account to OSM) and at "the Discord level," something else again. A mailing list "merely" requires an email address as an "account" to be registered with the talk-au mailing list, which could be argued (I begin, but offer nothing more than this assertion) that this is an "easier" (for "easiest" I add a ?) or at least "lower bar" and maybe "preferentially more anonymous" or "less privacy invasive" method, for those reasons. Registering on talk-au doesn't require agreeing to what we agree to to become Contributors, "merely" to join a "talking community" about "things Australia regarding OSM." By providing an email address and registering with a mailman account, that's both "low-bar" and "fairly sharply focused" at the same time. A great benefit are many relevant eyeballs who read the "contact us questions" which seem to have arisen. While I'm not, I could imaging myself as an IT person at a National P and reading the analysis above, nodding my head, agreeing that it isn't a very high bar to jump over to have a chat. And then, having a chat. > On Nov 1, 2023, at 8:52 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > DWG have received a > "Request for a Liaison Officer: > To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW National > Parks and Wildlife Service" > > This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously > requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) > > What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like this > - here / Forum / Discord? > > Question posed in all three places > > Thanks > > Graeme > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
Due to the structure of OSM, we don't have a single "Liaison Officer", so it's best if they join the list here and join the community discussion. I'm happy to engage directly with them if they prefer a single point of contact, but I'd need to stress that no single person is an authority within OSM and all I could really do is help support them with how OSM works from a community side. On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 14:57, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > DWG have received a > "*Request for a Liaison Officer*: > To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW > National Parks and Wildlife Service" > > This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously > requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) > > What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like > this - here / Forum / Discord? > > Question posed in all three places > > Thanks > > Graeme > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison
DWG have received a "*Request for a Liaison Officer*: To enhance the accuracy of OpenStreetMap data pertaining to the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service" This has come up in regard to tracks that they say they have previously requested be deleted (I'm contacting them to confirm just which?) What would be the easiest way for them to contact us with questions like this - here / Forum / Discord? Question posed in all three places Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
