Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Marco Boeringa]

Andy, so what is your suggestion right now, do this manually or with 
automated tools? Personally, I only did a few reverts using the JOSM 
plugin, only reverting an entire changeset, not selectively as you seem 
to suggest here. I have no experience with the other tools you mention.


Would the tools you are familiar with allow for a relatively easy 
partial revert, only removing the natural=heath features from all the 
changesets of these users? This might then be the preferred solution. I 
have thought about downloading selections of features of regions via 
Overpass, and than use these to inspect the potentially problematic 
features in JOSM and delete them there. But if there is a better way, 
than that might be the preferred way to go.


Marco


Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to
identify natural features?


Ha!  While DWG work sometimes does involve a bit of sleuthing (e.g.
finding the author of a problem app when there's nothing to go on in the
changeset info) I think that you may be overestimating our powers here



There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also
see being part of these changesets.


I'd tend to agree with that, though the perl revert scripts, which can
"not touch things since edited by other mappers" and "undo changes made
by one particular user in particular changesets" might be userful.



---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[ael]

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:35:05PM -0700, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> 
> I think it's very unlikely, however, that these users are editing OSM for a
> company. Probably the majority of edits in the UK are done by what you might
> call "lone mappers". Generally this works well and people plough their own
> furrows successfully, happily modifying their practice if particular issues
> are pointed out to them. But occasionally we have people who (perhaps
> because of limited social skills) find it difficult to follow established
> practice and co-operate with other contributors.

To be fair to Sam888, when I sent him a private message about "heath"
he replied acknowledging that "moorland" was more accurate than heath.
He said that he had used Bing originally, but after my message had used
streetview to confirm "moorland".

So he was communicating back then (Feb 2016) at least once.

He didn't comment on the fact that I knew the area rather well and had
extensively surveyed with gps and photography

ael




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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/02/2017 21:46, Brian Prangle wrote:


Might we tackle this task under the general heading either of "landuse 
fixes" or "uplands" as our next quarterly project?


I thought that was going to be to survey all those "Pokemon parks" :)

Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Brian Prangle]

I came across glucosamine during the farmyards quarterly projectwhere
she/he'd tagged place=farm to every group of isolated buildings all over
Herefordshire. I think he/she means well just misinterprets tagging
conventions and then rolls on regardless.

Might we tackle this task under the general heading either of "landuse
fixes" or "uplands" as our next quarterly project? That gives us some time
to discuss approaches, conventions , progress tools etc so that we can hit
the ground running so to speak on day 1

Regards

Brian

On 8 February 2017 at 21:35, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> Marco Boeringa wrote:
> > There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost
> > no changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems
> > to me these are editors working professionally for some OSM
> > related company.
>
> Thanks for the detective work and for persisting with this.
>
> I think it's very unlikely, however, that these users are editing OSM for a
> company. Probably the majority of edits in the UK are done by what you
> might
> call "lone mappers". Generally this works well and people plough their own
> furrows successfully, happily modifying their practice if particular issues
> are pointed out to them. But occasionally we have people who (perhaps
> because of limited social skills) find it difficult to follow established
> practice and co-operate with other contributors. There have been several
> examples in the past and I'm sure many regulars here will be aware of a few
> of them.
>
> That's what I think we have here. I have no knowledge as to whether
> Glucosamine, Dyserth and Sam888 are the same person or not - it wouldn't
> surprise me either way. But they/he very much fit the "uncommunicative lone
> mapper" model.
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.
> com/Large-swaths-of-heath-in-Wales-tp5890778p5890908.html
> Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Richard Fairhurst]

Marco Boeringa wrote:
> There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost 
> no changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems 
> to me these are editors working professionally for some OSM 
> related company.

Thanks for the detective work and for persisting with this.

I think it's very unlikely, however, that these users are editing OSM for a
company. Probably the majority of edits in the UK are done by what you might
call "lone mappers". Generally this works well and people plough their own
furrows successfully, happily modifying their practice if particular issues
are pointed out to them. But occasionally we have people who (perhaps
because of limited social skills) find it difficult to follow established
practice and co-operate with other contributors. There have been several
examples in the past and I'm sure many regulars here will be aware of a few
of them.

That's what I think we have here. I have no knowledge as to whether
Glucosamine, Dyserth and Sam888 are the same person or not - it wouldn't
surprise me either way. But they/he very much fit the "uncommunicative lone
mapper" model.

cheers
Richard





--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Large-swaths-of-heath-in-Wales-tp5890778p5890908.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/02/2017 20:46, Marco Boeringa wrote:


- Sam888, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413378224

- Glucosamine: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405845733

- Dyserth: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388818928

There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost 
no changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems to me 
these are editors working professionally for some OSM related company.




Whilst anything is possible; I'm not convinced.  They don't have that 
"map all of X following a management edict" style that mappers-for-pay 
tend to have.  The sort of things they map differs from each other, and 
at least one of them readily replies to changeset discussion comments:


http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2762871
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=1302721
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=1892838

I'm actually pretty sure that they all actually "mean well" and are 
trying to do the right thing, even if (in the first case at least) their 
edits are mostly misguided.


Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these 
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this 
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to 
identify natural features?




Ha!  While DWG work sometimes does involve a bit of sleuthing (e.g. 
finding the author of a problem app when there's nothing to go on in the 
changeset info) I think that you may be overestimating our powers here :)



There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost 
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed 
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also 
see being part of these changesets.


I'd tend to agree with that, though the perl revert scripts, which can 
"not touch things since edited by other mappers" and "undo changes made 
by one particular user in particular changesets" might be userful.




I have the feeling the most offending stuff is primarily the false 
natural=heath. 


... and (in the case of one of those mappers) also tracks.  See the 
discussion on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33841330 .


So maybe it is a better course of action to select the heath features 
in the affected regions in JOSM, and delete only those in a new 
changeset. I think this is by far the easiest solution. Of course, a 
bit of caution and review will be required to not include properly 
digitized heath features by regular OSM users.


Any other ideas?


"nodes last edited by" might be useful too, for example:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/lN9

Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[ael]

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:30:03PM +, Brian Prangle wrote:
> Be bold!  If you know the area and in your opinion it's junk then delete
> it. I've done a couple of areas in Shopshire I know.  I don't know what the
> consensus is for tagging so I added a placeholder of
> landuse=unimproved_grassland. What should we be tagging with?
> 

I have used natural=moor for some parts of Bodmin Moor. I know that it
isn't rendered as yet, but that seems by far the most appropriate 
description.

As for being bold, I am normally very reluctant to throw away other
people's work, but I think it is justified in this case. But it will be
hit and miss without a systematic trawl through the user's (users')
changesets. And if I delete stuff outside the region I have surveyed, I
may be trampling on areas where there are active local mappers who might
reasonably be upset.

Not sure when I will have time to do a thorough job any time soon.

ael


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Andrew Hain]

According to http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2762871 
edits in Brazil, Russia, the United Arab Emirates and Senegal have also 
attracted criticism from locally knowledgeable mappers, looking like someone 
who is at best out of their depth.

--
Andrew

From: Marco Boeringa 
Sent: 08 February 2017 20:46:10
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

Hi all,

I now had a very preliminary and short look at some of the changesets
involved in the Wales area, which was revealing. I now noticed most of
these features seem to have been added by multiple users / accounts:

- Sam888, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413378224

- Glucosamine: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405845733

- Dyserth: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388818928

There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost no
changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems to me these
are editors working professionally for some OSM related company.

Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to identify
natural features?

There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also
see being part of these changesets.

I have the feeling the most offending stuff is primarily the false
natural=heath. So maybe it is a better course of action to select the
heath features in the affected regions in JOSM, and delete only those in
a new changeset. I think this is by far the easiest solution. Of course,
a bit of caution and review will be required to not include properly
digitized heath features by regular OSM users.

Any other ideas?

Marco

> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:09:24 +
> From: ael 
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?
> Message-ID: <20170208130924.wdbn72h2r6rk7n6f@shelf.conquest>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +, Andy Townsend wrote:
>> On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
>>>   It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
>>> actually decided to act on our discussions.
> I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
> modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
> something like that was going to happen.
>
> As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
> West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
> surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
> although I was sure they were wrong.
>
> In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
> just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
> bulkish reversion.
>
> ael
>


---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Marco Boeringa]

Hi all,

I now had a very preliminary and short look at some of the changesets 
involved in the Wales area, which was revealing. I now noticed most of 
these features seem to have been added by multiple users / accounts:


- Sam888, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413378224

- Glucosamine: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405845733

- Dyserth: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388818928

There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost no 
changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems to me these 
are editors working professionally for some OSM related company.


Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these 
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this 
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to identify 
natural features?


There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost 
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed 
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also 
see being part of these changesets.


I have the feeling the most offending stuff is primarily the false 
natural=heath. So maybe it is a better course of action to select the 
heath features in the affected regions in JOSM, and delete only those in 
a new changeset. I think this is by far the easiest solution. Of course, 
a bit of caution and review will be required to not include properly 
digitized heath features by regular OSM users.


Any other ideas?

Marco


--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:09:24 +
From: ael 
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?
Message-ID: <20170208130924.wdbn72h2r6rk7n6f@shelf.conquest>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +, Andy Townsend wrote:

On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:

  It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
actually decided to act on our discussions.

I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
something like that was going to happen.

As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
although I was sure they were wrong.

In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
bulkish reversion.

ael




---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Michael

Not sure what the process is now - it was so long ago we did the last one.
Can anyone help Michael?

Regards

Brian

On 3 February 2017 at 23:22, Michael Booth  wrote:

> On a related note, what is the process for getting an import in places
> that don't already have NAPTAN data? I'd be interested in having bus stops
> in Fife imported.
>
>
> On 03/02/2017 17:52, Brian Prangle wrote:
>
> Hi everyone
>
> We have an opportunity to work with the regional transport authority TfWM
> to update this data which is 8 years old and partially edited by OSM users.
> They have assigned 2 developers to work on this and I'm spending a half day
> each week working with them.
>
> We've agreed and discussed this in our mappa mercia group and also
> contacted a prolific local public transport OSM editor who's not part of
> our group.
>
> In line with the automated edits policy there's a wikipage
> 
> with full details
>
> Comments welcome as this exercise might be useful elswhere as the state of
> NAPTAN data will be in a similar state
>
> regards
>
> Brian
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing 
> listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Brian Prangle]

Be bold!  If you know the area and in your opinion it's junk then delete
it. I've done a couple of areas in Shopshire I know.  I don't know what the
consensus is for tagging so I added a placeholder of
landuse=unimproved_grassland. What should we be tagging with?



On 8 February 2017 at 13:09, ael  wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
> > >  It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
> > > actually decided to act on our discussions.
>
> I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
> modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
> something like that was going to happen.
>
> As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
> West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
> surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
> although I was sure they were wrong.
>
> In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
> just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
> bulkish reversion.
>
> ael
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Review of Solihull naptan data

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Ed

Only one and that's one I surveyed

Regards

Brian

On 8 February 2017 at 15:44, Ed Loach  wrote:

> How many of those also have physically_present=no (so definitely a bus
> stop, but no pole) as described here:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Surveying_and_
> Merging_NaPTAN_and_OSM_data#physically_present
>
> ?
>
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Prangle [mailto:br...@mappa-mercia.org]
> *Sent:* 08 February 2017 12:35
> *To:* OSM Group WM 
> *Subject:* [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Review of Solihull naptan data
>
>
>
> Hi everyone
>
> I've found 39 CUS stops that are marked with highway=bus_stop. Over 60%
> were edited by reliable mappers so I'd trust our data mostly I think it
> will be where CUS stops have been upgraded by TfWM sticking a pole in the
> ground.
>
> I think we can live with any anomalies unti an automated edit  updates
> this data.
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
> ___
> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
> Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
>
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Review of Solihull naptan data

[Ed Loach]

How many of those also have physically_present=no (so definitely a bus stop, 
but no pole) as described here:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Surveying_and_Merging_NaPTAN_and_OSM_data#physically_present

?

 

Ed

 

From: Brian Prangle [mailto:br...@mappa-mercia.org] 
Sent: 08 February 2017 12:35
To: OSM Group WM 
Subject: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Review of Solihull naptan data

 

Hi everyone

I've found 39 CUS stops that are marked with highway=bus_stop. Over 60% were 
edited by reliable mappers so I'd trust our data mostly I think it will be 
where CUS stops have been upgraded by TfWM sticking a pole in the ground.

I think we can live with any anomalies unti an automated edit  updates this 
data.

Regards

Brian

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: [HOT] Study: validation feedback can provide important social affirmation

[Jez Nicholson]

Good thinking Christian.

>From the comments we might also monitor the progress of #GeoChicas with
getting more women involved with OSM.

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 at 13:22 Christian Ledermann <
christian.lederm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry for crossposting, I thought this is valuable information
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Martin Dittus 
> Date: 8 February 2017 at 00:34
> Subject: [HOT] Study: validation feedback can provide important social
> affirmation
> To: HOT List 
>
>
> After my talk at State of the Map in Brussels, Nick Allen asked: are
> newcomers more likely to be retained if we give them positive
> validation feedback? I had no answer at the time, but Tyler kindly
> gave me permission to look at the data to find out. The resulting
> findings are now under peer review, and I will share the full research
> once the process has concluded.
>
> In the meantime, I just posted a diary entry with the key findings:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/40421
>
> Do post a comment in case you have any questions. Or maybe you have
> made your own observations that can contribute to a better
> understanding of the impact of validation?
>
> Greetings from London,
>
> m.
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> h...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Christian Ledermann
>
> Newark-on-Trent - UK
> Mobile : +44 7474997517 <+44%207474%20997517>
>
> https://uk.linkedin.com/in/christianledermann
> https://github.com/cleder/
>
>
> <*)))>{
>
> If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left,
> you will also automatically save the physical environment, too. But If
> you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both.
>
> 1) Don’t drive species to extinction
>
> 2) Don’t destroy a habitat that species rely on.
>
> 3) Don’t change the climate in ways that will result in the above.
>
> }<(((*>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Fwd: [HOT] Study: validation feedback can provide important social affirmation

[Christian Ledermann]

Sorry for crossposting, I thought this is valuable information

-- Forwarded message --
From: Martin Dittus 
Date: 8 February 2017 at 00:34
Subject: [HOT] Study: validation feedback can provide important social
affirmation
To: HOT List 


After my talk at State of the Map in Brussels, Nick Allen asked: are
newcomers more likely to be retained if we give them positive
validation feedback? I had no answer at the time, but Tyler kindly
gave me permission to look at the data to find out. The resulting
findings are now under peer review, and I will share the full research
once the process has concluded.

In the meantime, I just posted a diary entry with the key findings:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/40421

Do post a comment in case you have any questions. Or maybe you have
made your own observations that can contribute to a better
understanding of the impact of validation?

Greetings from London,

m.
___
HOT mailing list
h...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


-- 
Best Regards,

Christian Ledermann

Newark-on-Trent - UK
Mobile : +44 7474997517

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/christianledermann
https://github.com/cleder/


<*)))>{

If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left,
you will also automatically save the physical environment, too. But If
you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both.

1) Don’t drive species to extinction

2) Don’t destroy a habitat that species rely on.

3) Don’t change the climate in ways that will result in the above.

}<(((*>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[ael]

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
> >  It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
> > actually decided to act on our discussions.

I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
something like that was going to happen.

As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
although I was sure they were wrong.

In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
bulkish reversion.

ael


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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Review of Solihull naptan data

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

I've found 39 CUS stops that are marked with highway=bus_stop. Over 60%
were edited by reliable mappers so I'd trust our data mostly I think it
will be where CUS stops have been upgraded by TfWM sticking a pole in the
ground.
I think we can live with any anomalies unti an automated edit  updates this
data.

Regards

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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] TfWM naptan data cleanup

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

This week's work has resulted in the following:

1.Removed all bus stop nodes from highways to side of way. These were
mainly in NW of the region. I might not have got the correct side in every
case, but this will be corrected by a later automated edit
2.TfWM's location data is not quite as accurate as we hoped so we haven't
proceeded. We used QGIS to compare the two sets of data on aerial imagery-
where it's  out, it's out by no more than 2-3m. Is there a way of comparing
the  2 sets of data on an OSM dev server somewhere (or other visualisation
service) for the  online community review to see if it's worth proceeding?
Is a better way to quantify this with a proximity script? Anyone know how
to use one? The default is just to accept our current location data.
3.As part of our learning curve, we discovered that we need to export turbo
overpass data as OSM-XML
4. The dataset we have now, ready for upload includes up-to-date route_ref
data for all stops which will be a huge improvement
5. Solihull data has been improved by selecting all naptan stops in OSM
that aren't marked CUS and adding highway=bus_stop tags. We'll have to live
with any of these tags from the 8 year old naptan data not representig
existing stops until we can run an automated edit that selects all the
deleted stops from TfWM's data and deletes  the bus_stop tags. Take a look;
any comments welcome
6. We're using the changeset  description #wmca_naptan_refresh
7. We'll cleanup the Swift Collector data manually  once we've
cross-correlated shelter data to bus stop data as there are only 112 nodes

Regards

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
 It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and 
actually decided to act on our discussions.


Well I fixed the northern boundary of the Merthyr "Heath" where it 
overlapped with stuff that I was mapping a couple of months ago :)


Seriously, I'd suggest that where people see stuff that's "obviously 
wrong" they either just delete it, or if they think there's any benefit 
in keeping the geometry, removing the tags and adding notes.  It needs 
to be done by people familiar with the area(s) though - I can't really 
help with Snowdonia as I haven't been there recently enough.  If people 
are unsure, shout up on #osm-gb or here - I bet someone will be able to 
help.


If anyone thinks a revert-based approach makes sense for a particular 
changeset or series of changesets and is unfamiliar with the tools 
available, let me know (with a DWG hat on I've had to become familar 
with the various options available).


As an aside, the mapper concerned is blocked again 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1187 for continued failure to 
communicate (including lack of replies to repeated questions about crap 
mapping).  There's circumstantial evidence that they're actually a new 
name for a previous "problem" mapper so please keep an eye open for 
broad-brush changes of this type from other user names too.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Marco Boeringa]

Hi Brian,

Yes, I would especially second Jerry's good comments in the previous 
discussion thread he started about sticking to a "strict" definition of 
heath as being characterized by species of the Ericacea 
(http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/natural-heath-td5888994.html). This is 
also a quite common definition for heath on topographic maps in other 
countries, e.g. here in the Netherlands where I live.


Marco

Op 8-2-2017 om 11:49 schreef Brian Prangle:

Hi everyone

Looks like a challenge.  We have discussed this before and there were 
lots of very thoughtful and knowledgeable opinions, but no decisions 
on any actions. I kind of got the consensus that many were 
uncomfortable with the spread of heathland landuse data but we never 
decided to do anything about it.  It would be great in my opinion if 
we moved on as a community and actually decided to act on our discussions.


Regards

Brian

On 8 February 2017 at 10:37, Marco Boeringa > wrote:


Hi David,

I know the opinions about the need to create multipolygons are as
diverse as there are political opinions. It was just one example
where these features cause issues. My main question is simply if
there are any plans or ideas by the British community of how to
deal with these features, or if there is any consensus whether
they are desired or not. If not, would the community oppose
someone else removing them?

Marco

On 07/02/17 19:19, Marco Boeringa wrote:
> Lastly, the lack of proper multipolygon creation, means that
other types
> of renderers and styles than Carto, and GIS's like QGIS and
ArcGIS, that
> do not stack features based on size but need multipolygons to
deal with
> polygon-within-polygon problems, have many older detailed features
> covered up by these new ones, as the original data may be hidden
beneath
> the newly added ones.

That' a problem with the renderers.  Multipolygons are difficult for
both (human) editors and (machine) renderers, so only be used where
strictly necessary.




Virusvrij. www.avast.com





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







---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Looks like a challenge.  We have discussed this before and there were lots
of very thoughtful and knowledgeable opinions, but no decisions on any
actions. I kind of got the consensus that many were uncomfortable with the
spread of heathland landuse data but we never decided to do anything about
it.  It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
actually decided to act on our discussions.

Regards

Brian

On 8 February 2017 at 10:37, Marco Boeringa  wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> I know the opinions about the need to create multipolygons are as diverse
> as there are political opinions. It was just one example where these
> features cause issues. My main question is simply if there are any plans or
> ideas by the British community of how to deal with these features, or if
> there is any consensus whether they are desired or not. If not, would the
> community oppose someone else removing them?
>
> Marco
>
> On 07/02/17 19:19, Marco Boeringa wrote:
> > Lastly, the lack of proper multipolygon creation, means that other types
> > of renderers and styles than Carto, and GIS's like QGIS and ArcGIS, that
> > do not stack features based on size but need multipolygons to deal with
> > polygon-within-polygon problems, have many older detailed features
> > covered up by these new ones, as the original data may be hidden beneath
> > the newly added ones.
>
> That' a problem with the renderers.  Multipolygons are difficult for
> both (human) editors and (machine) renderers, so only be used where
> strictly necessary.
>
>
> 
>  Virusvrij.
> www.avast.com
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Marco Boeringa]

Hi David,

I know the opinions about the need to create multipolygons are as 
diverse as there are political opinions. It was just one example where 
these features cause issues. My main question is simply if there are any 
plans or ideas by the British community of how to deal with these 
features, or if there is any consensus whether they are desired or not. 
If not, would the community oppose someone else removing them?


Marco

On 07/02/17 19:19, Marco Boeringa wrote:
> Lastly, the lack of proper multipolygon creation, means that other types
> of renderers and styles than Carto, and GIS's like QGIS and ArcGIS, that
> do not stack features based on size but need multipolygons to deal with
> polygon-within-polygon problems, have many older detailed features
> covered up by these new ones, as the original data may be hidden beneath
> the newly added ones.

That' a problem with the renderers.  Multipolygons are difficult for
both (human) editors and (machine) renderers, so only be used where
strictly necessary.



---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb