subject:"\[Talk\-in\] Hello"

Op ma 28 sep. 2020 om 20:55 schreef Dave F via Talk-GB
:
>
> On 28/09/2020 17:53, Dan S wrote:
> > Hi Rodrigo
> >
> > I think Loomio is designed
> > for the purpose of making good decisions together:
>
> Come again? Why do you think "good decisions" can't be made here? What
> do those who don't wish to join yet another off-shoot do?

Please, Dave, try not to be so shocked by everything. Email is a tool.
Loomio is a tool. Mediawiki is a tool. The designers of Loomio tried
to create a tool specifically for group decision-making. That's all!

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites


On 28/09/2020 17:53, Dan S wrote:

Hi Rodrigo

I think Loomio is designed
for the purpose of making good decisions together:


Come again? Why do you think "good decisions" can't be made here? What 
do those who don't wish to join yet another off-shoot do?


DaveF


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

Hi Chris,

Both the wiki, and the Loomio, require a separate log in account which
is not the same as the main OSM account. So the barriers are the same.

I don't think the Loomio is restricted to just OSM UK "official
business" - though I might be wrong! Someone please correct me.

I do agree with you that a vote isn't necessarily all that helpful. It
was one of the original ways that the OSM community started
self-organising its tagging, but because of various limitations it's
very much fallen into disrepair as a way of doing things. I hope that
"good decision-making tools" like Loomio might be a way forward - but
I don't imagine it's a silver bullet.

Best
Dan

Op ma 28 sep. 2020 om 18:31 schreef Chris Hill :
>
> {this time to the list]
>
> And the people who care about OSM and the way imports and automated
> edits affects OSM, but don't use Loomio and are not connected to OSM UK?
> What should they do?
>
> Everyone in OSM has access to the Wiki.
>
> Having said that, I'm not sure what a vote will do. OSM is very clearly
> not a democracy in any sense. Voting tends to give any outcome the
> veneer of consultation and listening to feedback, but in practice so few
> people vote that the process is meaningless.
>
> Chris (chillly)
>
> On 28/09/2020 17:53, Dan S wrote:
> > Hi Rodrigo
> >
> > Before you create a vote on the wiki, can I suggest a different
> > method? "OSM UK" has started using Loomio for discussions and votes,
> > and it generally seems to work out well. I think Loomio is designed
> > for the purpose of making good decisions together:
> > https://www.loomio.org/openstreetmap-uk/
> >
> > I'm sorry, I don't wish to confuse you with tools and differing opinions...
> >
> > Cheers
> > Dan
> >
> > Op ma 28 sep. 2020 om 15:31 schreef Rodrigo Díez Villamuera
> > :
> >> Thanks all of you for your messages.
> >>
> >> As a new joiner, I could not ask for more than other members engaging in 
> >> such a passionate way :)
> >>
> >> It's fair to say that there is no clear consensus of whether the proposal, 
> >> in its current form, is acceptable or not. So, I am going to create a 
> >> voting section on the wiki page to help us visualise what people think
> >>
> >> However, before I do that I would like to reply to a point that was made 
> >> by Andy
> >>
> >> Andy,
> >>
> >> I'm not actually convinced that's a problem - as others have said, web 
> >> browsers are perfectly capable of converting "www.mypub.com" into either 
> >> "https://www.mypub.com"or ""http://www.mypub.com"as appropriate, so this 
> >> doesn't really add any value.  "Letting the browser sort it out" is a 
> >> great approach as it can deal with now/near future things such as removal 
> >> TLS 1.0 and 1.1 support as well.
> >>
> >> This is not true based on my experience. I just tested on the latest 
> >> version of Chrome and Firefox and, if the URL scheme is not specified, 
> >> they both open the the URL using http even if https is also available for 
> >> it.
> >>
> >> You may have experienced a behaviour by which the user gets redirected 
> >> from the http url to the https one but that depends on the configuration 
> >> of the site server which is not always set-up.
> >>
> >> This is also well documented for Firefox here: 
> >> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/URL_Bar_Algorithm
> >>
> >> I see value in updating schemaless :website tags with the https version if 
> >> available.
> >> --
> >> Rodrigo Díez Villamuera
> >>
> >> w: http://rodrigodiez.io
> >> t: @rodrigodiez_pro
> >> p: 00 44 7513 638225
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 13:50, Andy Mabbett  
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:00, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> >>>
>  The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
>  conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
>  "wrong" URLs can be added at any time).
> >>> This seems like an argument for never fixing any error.
> >>>
>  So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
>  meaningful information whatsoever.
> >>> This statement is false, not least because in some cases "http://; is
> >>> added, in others "https://;; each of those - and the difference
> >>> between them - conveys meaningful information.
> >>>
>  It creates load on the database
> >>> The level of load is trivial. Have our database maintainers ever said
> >>> that a load of such small magnitude is problematic?
> >>>
>  There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
>  useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
>  outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
>  add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
>  of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
>  here.
> >>> Denigrating another's contribution - a valid and valuable contribution
> >>> - in this manner is antithetical to the spirit in which OSM

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Chris Hill

{this time to the list]

And the people who care about OSM and the way imports and automated
edits affects OSM, but don't use Loomio and are not connected to OSM UK?
What should they do?

Everyone in OSM has access to the Wiki.

Having said that, I'm not sure what a vote will do. OSM is very clearly
not a democracy in any sense. Voting tends to give any outcome the
veneer of consultation and listening to feedback, but in practice so few
people vote that the process is meaningless.

Chris (chillly)

On 28/09/2020 17:53, Dan S wrote:

Hi Rodrigo

Before you create a vote on the wiki, can I suggest a different
method? "OSM UK" has started using Loomio for discussions and votes,
and it generally seems to work out well. I think Loomio is designed
for the purpose of making good decisions together:
https://www.loomio.org/openstreetmap-uk/

I'm sorry, I don't wish to confuse you with tools and differing opinions...

Cheers
Dan

Op ma 28 sep. 2020 om 15:31 schreef Rodrigo Díez Villamuera
:

Thanks all of you for your messages.

As a new joiner, I could not ask for more than other members engaging in such a
passionate way :)

It's fair to say that there is no clear consensus of whether the proposal, in
its current form, is acceptable or not. So, I am going to create a voting
section on the wiki page to help us visualise what people think

However, before I do that I would like to reply to a point that was made by Andy

Andy,

I'm not actually convinced that's a problem - as others have said, web browsers are perfectly capable of converting
"www.mypub.com" into either "https://www.mypub.com"or ""http://www.mypub.com"as
appropriate, so this doesn't really add any value. "Letting the browser sort it out" is a great approach as it
can deal with now/near future things such as removal TLS 1.0 and 1.1 support as well.

This is not true based on my experience. I just tested on the latest version of
Chrome and Firefox and, if the URL scheme is not specified, they both open the
the URL using http even if https is also available for it.

You may have experienced a behaviour by which the user gets redirected from the
http url to the https one but that depends on the configuration of the site
server which is not always set-up.

This is also well documented for Firefox here:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/URL_Bar_Algorithm

I see value in updating schemaless :website tags with the https version if
available.
--
Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

w: http://rodrigodiez.io
t: @rodrigodiez_pro
p: 00 44 7513 638225

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 13:50, Andy Mabbett wrote:

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:00, Frederik Ramm wrote:

The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
"wrong" URLs can be added at any time).

This seems like an argument for never fixing any error.

So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
meaningful information whatsoever.

This statement is false, not least because in some cases "http://; is
added, in others "https://;; each of those - and the difference
between them - conveys meaningful information.

It creates load on the database

The level of load is trivial. Have our database maintainers ever said
that a load of such small magnitude is problematic?

There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
here.

Denigrating another's contribution - a valid and valuable contribution
- in this manner is antithetical to the spirit in which OSM activity
is supposed to be conducted.

Remember: OSM is not an IT project.

Of course it is. "Information technology (IT) is the use of computers
to store, retrieve, transmit, and manipulate data or information." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB




28 wrz 2020, 13:53 od talk-gb@openstreetmap.org:

>
>
> On 28/09/2020 10:00, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
>> conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
>> "wrong" URLs can be added at any time).
>>
>
> Moot. Your claim applies to all tags, all the time. By your logic we might as 
> well not amend anything.
>
Yes, this argument would work as argument
against any type of fix.

fixing case of
 highway=mtorway to highway=motorway
would be useful, despite that it may appear
again and it is possible to add automatic fix
for that

(I am not enthusiastic about this pub edit,
as benefit are minimal but if someone
wants to spend time on that I see nothing
wrong with that)

(I am also thinking whatever wiki should 
claim that http / https is needed -
in practice it is not really needed or useful)___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

Hi Rodrigo

Before you create a vote on the wiki, can I suggest a different
method? "OSM UK" has started using Loomio for discussions and votes,
and it generally seems to work out well. I think Loomio is designed
for the purpose of making good decisions together:
https://www.loomio.org/openstreetmap-uk/

I'm sorry, I don't wish to confuse you with tools and differing opinions...

Cheers
Dan

Op ma 28 sep. 2020 om 15:31 schreef Rodrigo Díez Villamuera
:
>
> Thanks all of you for your messages.
>
> As a new joiner, I could not ask for more than other members engaging in such 
> a passionate way :)
>
> It's fair to say that there is no clear consensus of whether the proposal, in 
> its current form, is acceptable or not. So, I am going to create a voting 
> section on the wiki page to help us visualise what people think
>
> However, before I do that I would like to reply to a point that was made by 
> Andy
>
> Andy,
>
> I'm not actually convinced that's a problem - as others have said, web 
> browsers are perfectly capable of converting "www.mypub.com" into either 
> "https://www.mypub.com"or ""http://www.mypub.com"as appropriate, so this 
> doesn't really add any value.  "Letting the browser sort it out" is a great 
> approach as it can deal with now/near future things such as removal TLS 1.0 
> and 1.1 support as well.
>
> This is not true based on my experience. I just tested on the latest version 
> of Chrome and Firefox and, if the URL scheme is not specified, they both open 
> the the URL using http even if https is also available for it.
>
> You may have experienced a behaviour by which the user gets redirected from 
> the http url to the https one but that depends on the configuration of the 
> site server which is not always set-up.
>
> This is also well documented for Firefox here: 
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/URL_Bar_Algorithm
>
> I see value in updating schemaless :website tags with the https version if 
> available.
> --
> Rodrigo Díez Villamuera
>
> w: http://rodrigodiez.io
> t: @rodrigodiez_pro
> p: 00 44 7513 638225
>
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 13:50, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:00, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
>>
>> > The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
>> > conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
>> > "wrong" URLs can be added at any time).
>>
>> This seems like an argument for never fixing any error.
>>
>> > So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
>> > meaningful information whatsoever.
>>
>> This statement is false, not least because in some cases "http://; is
>> added, in others "https://;; each of those - and the difference
>> between them - conveys meaningful information.
>>
>> > It creates load on the database
>>
>> The level of load is trivial. Have our database maintainers ever said
>> that a load of such small magnitude is problematic?
>>
>> > There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
>> > useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
>> > outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
>> > add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
>> > of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
>> > here.
>>
>> Denigrating another's contribution - a valid and valuable contribution
>> - in this manner is antithetical to the spirit in which OSM activity
>> is supposed to be conducted.
>>
>> > Remember: OSM is not an IT project.
>>
>> Of course it is. "Information technology (IT) is the use of computers
>> to store, retrieve, transmit, and manipulate data or information." [1]
>>
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>>
>> ___
>> 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 mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites




On 28/09/2020 15:29, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:

Thanks all of you for your messages.

As a new joiner, I could not ask for more than other members engaging 
in such a passionate way :)


It's fair to say that there is no clear consensus of whether the 
proposal, in its current form, is acceptable or not. So, I am going to 
create a voting section on the wiki page to help us visualise what 
people think


However, before I do that I would like to reply to a point that was 
made by Andy


Andy,

/I'm not actually convinced that's a problem - as others have said, 
*web browsers are perfectly capable of converting "www.mypub.com 
" into either "https://www.mypub.com; 
or ""http://www.mypub.com; 
as appropriate*, so this doesn't really add any 
value. "Letting the browser sort it out" is a great approach as it can 
deal with now/near future things such as removal TLS 1.0 and 1.1 
support as well./


This is not true based on my experience. I just tested on the latest 
version of Chrome and Firefox and, if the URL scheme is not specified, 
they both open the the URL using http even if https is also available 
for it.


An example is Overpass Turbo which has three different pages:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/
http://overpass-turbo.eu/
www.overpass-turbo.eu/

If you've previously run different routines on each you'll see it 
displays them for each URL (tested on Firefox latest)


DaveF

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

Thanks all of you for your messages.

As a new joiner, I could not ask for more than other members engaging in
such a passionate way :)

It's fair to say that there is no clear consensus of whether the proposal,
in its current form, is acceptable or not. So, I am going to create a
voting section on the wiki page to help us visualise what people think

However, before I do that I would like to reply to a point that was made by
Andy

Andy,

*I'm not actually convinced that's a problem - as others have said, web
browsers are perfectly capable of converting "www.mypub.com
" into either "https://www.mypub.com;
or ""http://www.mypub.com; as
appropriate, so this doesn't really add any value.  "Letting the browser
sort it out" is a great approach as it can deal with now/near future things
such as removal TLS 1.0 and 1.1 support as well.*

This is not true based on my experience. I just tested on the latest
version of Chrome and Firefox and, if the URL scheme is not specified, they
both open the the URL using http even if https is also available for it.

You may have experienced a behaviour by which the user gets redirected from
the http url to the https one but that depends on the configuration of the
site server which is not always set-up.

This is also well documented for Firefox here:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/URL_Bar_Algorithm

I see value in updating schemaless :website tags with the https version if
available.
--
Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

w: http://rodrigodiez.io
t: @rodrigodiez_pro
p: 00 44 7513 638225

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 13:50, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:00, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
>
> > The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
> > conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
> > "wrong" URLs can be added at any time).
>
> This seems like an argument for never fixing any error.
>
> > So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
> > meaningful information whatsoever.
>
> This statement is false, not least because in some cases "http://; is
> added, in others "https://;; each of those - and the difference
> between them - conveys meaningful information.
>
> > It creates load on the database
>
> The level of load is trivial. Have our database maintainers ever said
> that a load of such small magnitude is problematic?
>
> > There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
> > useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
> > outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
> > add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
> > of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
> > here.
>
> Denigrating another's contribution - a valid and valuable contribution
> - in this manner is antithetical to the spirit in which OSM activity
> is supposed to be conducted.
>
> > Remember: OSM is not an IT project.
>
> Of course it is. "Information technology (IT) is the use of computers
> to store, retrieve, transmit, and manipulate data or information." [1]
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites


Three things to note:
SO3166-1=GB is misnomered & includes Northern Ireland. (As I found out, 
some contributors there get annoyed with UK wide edits). You may want to 
use area(id:3600058447,3600058437,3600058446); // England Wales Scotland 
instead.


Many pubs are mapped as ways/relations so node won't return the full 
amount. Use nwr instead.


If you need the output to be as individual nodes use 'out center' option.

area["ISO3166-1"=GB];
rel(pivot)->.UK;
nwr(area)[amenity=pub][website][website!~"http"];
out center;
.UK out geom;

DaveF

On 27/09/2020 16:28, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:

Hi all,

First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and 
to thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!


After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step 
as a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.


Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a 
proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community 
conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on 
the way. Be merciful! :P


To the point now.

I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with 
amenity:pub) for a pet project.


When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a 
website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).


Ie: www.mypub.com  rather than 
http://www.mypub.com or https://www.mypub.com


This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website. 



I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these 
nodes to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the 
nodes.


I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it here 
.


Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your 
feedback, comments and advises on how to proceed from here


Thanks in advance!








--
Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

w: http://rodrigodiez.io
t: @rodrigodiez_pro
p: 00 44 7513 638225


___
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] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Andy Mabbett

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:00, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
> conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
> "wrong" URLs can be added at any time).

This seems like an argument for never fixing any error.

> So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
> meaningful information whatsoever.

This statement is false, not least because in some cases "http://; is
added, in others "https://;; each of those - and the difference
between them - conveys meaningful information.

> It creates load on the database

The level of load is trivial. Have our database maintainers ever said
that a load of such small magnitude is problematic?

> There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
> useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
> outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
> add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
> of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
> here.

Denigrating another's contribution - a valid and valuable contribution
- in this manner is antithetical to the spirit in which OSM activity
is supposed to be conducted.

> Remember: OSM is not an IT project.

Of course it is. "Information technology (IT) is the use of computers
to store, retrieve, transmit, and manipulate data or information." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites


On 28/09/2020 10:56, Philip Barnes wrote:

On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 10:10 +0100, Mark Goodge wrote:

On 28/09/2020 10:00, Frederik Ramm wrote:


Remember: OSM is not an IT project.

Indeed not. But this is also a good example of the truism that OSM
is
not a map, it's a database. Having the right data in the database
matters. Fixing clear and obvious errors, such as invalid URLs in a
"website" tag, seems to me to be a worthwhile project if someone is
prepared to put the time and effort into doing it.


Although in my experience the concept of pubs having websites is kind
of dated, typically online communication with customers is via facebook
these days.


Anything other than your experience, as mine is the opposite. Facebook 
is for short lifespan messages not information which needs to be 
repeatedly accessed (menus, opening times etc)

Simply fixing invalid urls is not really a solution, the question needs
to be asked is this data still valid and rather than a mechanical fix
these entries need to be visited and checked.


Two, separate endeavours.

DaveF

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Frederik Ramm

Hi,

On 28.09.20 13:53, Dave F wrote:
> Anyone can contribute to OSM in ways that best suits them.
> He's here asking for advice & guidance

... and that's what he got from me. You're free to give different
advice, though I didn't find yours convincing in any way.

In my opinion the improvement that can be made by investing one hour in
a survey - any survey really - far outweighs the improvement that can be
made by investing one hour in automatically adding a string of
characters to a certain tag. And even besides that, I am not alone in
recommending that anyone getting more involved with OSM should do some
mapping first, before they embark on anything else. Just to know what
we're about.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites




On 28/09/2020 10:00, Frederik Ramm wrote:

Rodrigo,

On 27.09.20 17:28, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:

After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as
a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.

If your first idea of "how to contribute to OSM" is "how to write a
script that runs an automated edit on the body of OSM data", then
something is amiss!


Anyone can contribute to OSM in ways that best suits them.
He's here asking for advice & guidance & appears to be following the 
rules..



The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
"wrong" URLs can be added at any time).


Moot. Your claim applies to all tags, all the time. By your logic we 
might as well not amend anything.



Anyone consuming OSM data must
be able to work with URLs that miss a schema, and indeed today any
browser can do that.


I noted links without http or www. ie zonzorestaurant.com isn't 
recognized by OSM website, but is interpreted by web browsers.



So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
meaningful information whatsoever.


Conformity, accuracy.


  It creates load on the database;


Seriously? For how long?


it creates a new version of every object you touch which, informationally
speaking, is identical to the old version. It produces larger diff
files, larger history files, and on top of that runs the risk of making
data look more current than it is ("oh, this pub has last been changed
by someone two months ago, so surely it will still be in business" when
in fact the last OSMer who saw that pub with their own eyes did so five
years ago).


These are nit-picking excuses, that occur with all edits.

Unsure why some are against improving the quality of the database, 
especially by automated/mass edit*. Having one user amend hundreds of 
tags is the same as have hundreds of contributors amending individual 
tags, except there're all  checkable within one changeset & can *easily* 
be reverted if required.


* Please remember those who conceived this anti mass edit ruling were 
the ones who messed up the US TIGER import & couldn't be bothered to fix it.




There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
here.


This is my retort to the requests to join OSMF & sit through long, 
tedious committee meetings.

Again, we contribute to OSM in the way which best suits us.


Remember: OSM is not an IT project.


Tell that to the organisers/speakers at State of the Maps


DaveF

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Andy Townsend


On 27/09/2020 16:28, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:


I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with 
amenity:pub) for a pet project.


Firstly - welcome!




When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a 
website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).


Ie: www.mypub.com  rather than 
http://www.mypub.com  or https://www.mypub.com 



I'm not actually convinced that's a problem - as others have said, web 
browsers are perfectly capable of converting "www.mypub.com" into either 
"https://www.mypub.com"or ""http://www.mypub.com"as appropriate, so this 
doesn't really add any value.  "Letting the browser sort it out" is a 
great approach as it can deal with now/near future things such as 
removal TLS 1.0 and 1.1 support as well.





This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website. 



Unfortunately, OSM's wiki doesn't always reflect actual usage and this 
is one example.  Changing "www.mypub.com" to "https://www.mypub.com; 
doesn't really add any value unless you're actually updating something 
else about the pub.  Actually, using "www.mypub.com" has some advantages 
here as it allows the user's web browser to negotiate https if available 
(the default nowadays) but fall back to http if not.




I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these 
nodes to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the 
nodes.


I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it here 
.



What would be rather more interesting would be detecting websites that 
"don't or no longer represent the pub" in some way:


 * Perhaps the pub had a website, but now has new tenants, and they now
   communicate with customers on the facebook page?
 * Perhaps the website is (like one of your examples) just for the brewery?
 * Perhaps the website now points at domain parking?
 * Perhaps the https certificate has expired, which at the very least
   indicates that the website is unlikely to be kept up to date?

Any problems found would likely need to be resolved manually, but some 
at least of the above should be detectable automatically.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Andy Townsend


On 28/09/2020 10:25, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:


Anyone know if there's a way to at least use a UK based server or to 
conveniently ping multiple websites directly? 


In this case I don't see how that helps - it wouldn't detect domain 
parking pages, which is usually where a domain goes after the business 
that registers it folds and the domain has actual words in it (often the 
case here I suspect).


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Philip Barnes

On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 10:10 +0100, Mark Goodge wrote:
> 
> On 28/09/2020 10:00, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 
> > Remember: OSM is not an IT project.
> 
> Indeed not. But this is also a good example of the truism that OSM
> is 
> not a map, it's a database. Having the right data in the database 
> matters. Fixing clear and obvious errors, such as invalid URLs in a 
> "website" tag, seems to me to be a worthwhile project if someone is 
> prepared to put the time and effort into doing it.
> 
Although in my experience the concept of pubs having websites is kind
of dated, typically online communication with customers is via facebook
these days.

Simply fixing invalid urls is not really a solution, the question needs
to be asked is this data still valid and rather than a mechanical fix
these entries need to be visited and checked. Easy at the moment as any
valid site will have recent covid (table service/one way systems and
facemask information).

A simple sanity check of the three examples, and my browser does click
through without an issue.

The first does appear to be valid, although part of a large chain hence
the pub hence has IT support.

The second https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/20940218 leads to an
invalid url so a simple fix would be wrong.

The third https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21648679 leads to the pub
operating companys site, a url should be for the actual object not the
owning company. 

All of the examples I note are from Cambridge, which is certainly not
typical of the UK in general.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

Thanks for your replies,

Frederik thanks for your reply and advice as well. I know it comes from a
good place and from the experience of working on this project, which I
respect.

However, please allow me to humbly disagree with the overall message as I
think it makes some assumptions, generalizations and false dilemmas. Also
please take my comments on a constructive way

The fact that I am addressing this community to talk about a specific
proposal does not mean that my contribution to OSM will be limited to it.

Your comment seems to assume that the fix will be temporary and dismiss it
for it, but my idea is for this change to be a first baby step which
hopefully can evolve into a more permanent and recurrent process. By
dismissing the former because of its limited usage we are killing the later.

"Anyone consuming OSM data must be able to work with URLs that miss a
schema", from an engineering perspective we are introducing lots of
unnecessary work to the project ecosystem, especially consumers. A problem
that can be solved easily in origin is ignored and we force all consumers
to implement workaround independently potentially leading to
inconsistencies in how users see OSM data. I myself had to implement a
temporary workaround.

Another wrong assumption is that :website tags are only consumed by
browsers. This is definitely not the case.

Regarding the overhead and load in the database, I confess that I am not
quite familiar with the implications of an edit like that. Thanks for
pointing it out, I will definitely try to get more familiar with it

I have to disagree with your comment regarding the changes adding "no
meaninful information whatsoever". With a 22% of websites that can be
migrated to an https scheme and being http highly discouraged and
considered plainly unsafe by all major browsers, these changes will
positively impact end users and the owners of the amenities themselves.

You say that there are multiple better ways to contribute to OSM and this,
although it may be 100% true IMHO is a false dilemma. The fact that I am
proposing to fix an issue in the data does not imply my contribution will
end there.

Think for a second about the content of your message if who was reading it
was an impaired person who can't go outside with a notebook and browse pubs
around but rather has to stay at home with IT being their only way of
contribute to the project. This is not my case, but, did you know about it
beforehand?

--
Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

w: http://rodrigodiez.io
t: @rodrigodiez_pro
p: 00 44 7513 638225

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:28, Dave F via Talk-GB 
wrote:

> On 27/09/2020 19:35, Andrew Hain wrote:
>
> Keep Right flags web links that have gone offline.
>
>
> Unfortunately it doesn't really do that. After a discussion with the
> developer I found out it tests whether a server in central Europe has a
> link to the UK URLs not if the actual link is current. I was coming across
> far too many time consuming false-positives for it to be useful.
>
> Anyone know if there's a way to at least use a UK based server or to
> conveniently ping multiple websites directly?
>
> DaveF
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew
> --
> *From:* Philip Barnes  
> *Sent:* 27 September 2020 18:49
> *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
> 
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add
> missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites
>
> On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 16:28 +0100, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and to
> thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!
>
> After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as a
> contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.
>
> Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a
> proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community
> conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on the
> way. Be merciful! :P
>
> To the point now.
>
> I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with amenity:pub)
> for a pet project.
>
> When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a
> website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).
>
> Ie: www.mypub.com rather than http://www.mypub.com or
> https://www.mypub.com
>
> This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website.
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website>
>
> I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these nodes
> to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the nodes.
>
> I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it here
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/rodrigodi

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread ndrw


On 27/09/2020 16:28, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:

Hi all,

First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and 
to thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!


After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step 
as a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.


Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a 
proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community 
conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on 
the way. Be merciful! :P


To the point now.

I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with 
amenity:pub) for a pet project.


When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a 
website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).


Ie: www.mypub.com  rather than 
http://www.mypub.com or https://www.mypub.com


This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website. 




The proposed procedure looks good and since the scale is so small (127 
records) it's not very different from performing it by hand. IMHO it's a 
good mini project for starting your journey with osm.



I would go a step further though:

"If no valid scheme is found, do nothing" - that's OK, but as the next 
step please could you *manually* verify these links and either fix them 
or add a fixme tag.


Ndrw



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

On 27/09/2020 19:35, Andrew Hain wrote:

Keep Right flags web links that have gone offline.

Unfortunately it doesn't really do that. After a discussion with the
developer I found out it tests whether a server in central Europe has a
link to the UK URLs not if the actual link is current. I was coming
across far too many time consuming false-positives for it to be useful.

Anyone know if there's a way to at least use a UK based server or to
conveniently ping multiple websites directly?

DaveF

--
Andrew

*From:* Philip Barnes
*Sent:* 27 September 2020 18:49
*To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal:
Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 16:28 +0100, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:

Hi all,

First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and
to thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!

After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step
as a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.

Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with
a proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community
conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes
on the way. Be merciful! :P

To the point now.

I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with
amenity:pub) for a pet project.

When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a
website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema
(http/https).

Ie: www.mypub.com <http://www.mypub.com> rather than
http://www.mypub.com <http://www.mypub.com> or https://www.mypub.com

This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website.
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website>

I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these
nodes to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag
the nodes.

I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it here
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/rodrigodiez/Add_missing_URL_scheme_to_pub_websites_in_UK>.

Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your
feedback, comments and advises on how to proceed from here

One issue I can think of with pubs and websites is that they need
checking to ensure they are still current.

The defacto method most pubs use to communicate with customers is
facebook.

A more general fix of urls missing http(s)://, why only pubs?. is
probably a maproulette quest.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

Thank you Frederik - that's a good way to put it all.

Welcome Rodrigo! You'll find that Frederik's advice fits pretty well
to a common strand of thinking in OpenStreetMap. His advice is
surprising, for many of us joining OSM from an IT background (or even
a Wikipedia background, where automated edits are more widespread).
But please do take some time to think about his advice.

Best wishes
Dan

Op ma 28 sep. 2020 om 10:02 schreef Frederik Ramm :
>
> Rodrigo,
>
> On 27.09.20 17:28, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
> > After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as
> > a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.
>
> If your first idea of "how to contribute to OSM" is "how to write a
> script that runs an automated edit on the body of OSM data", then
> something is amiss!
>
> The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
> conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
> "wrong" URLs can be added at any time). Anyone consuming OSM data must
> be able to work with URLs that miss a schema, and indeed today any
> browser can do that.
>
> So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
> meaningful information whatsoever. It creates load on the database; it
> creates a new version of every object you touch which, informationally
> speaking, is identical to the old version. It produces larger diff
> files, larger history files, and on top of that runs the risk of making
> data look more current than it is ("oh, this pub has last been changed
> by someone two months ago, so surely it will still be in business" when
> in fact the last OSMer who saw that pub with their own eyes did so five
> years ago).
>
> There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
> useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
> outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
> add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
> of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
> here.
>
> Remember: OSM is not an IT project.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> 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] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Mark Goodge




On 28/09/2020 10:00, Frederik Ramm wrote:


Remember: OSM is not an IT project.


Indeed not. But this is also a good example of the truism that OSM is 
not a map, it's a database. Having the right data in the database 
matters. Fixing clear and obvious errors, such as invalid URLs in a 
"website" tag, seems to me to be a worthwhile project if someone is 
prepared to put the time and effort into doing it.


Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Frederik Ramm

Rodrigo,

On 27.09.20 17:28, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
> After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as
> a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.

If your first idea of "how to contribute to OSM" is "how to write a
script that runs an automated edit on the body of OSM data", then
something is amiss!

The change you plan to execute is of limited use. Yes, it ensures more
conformity in the data, but it will be a temporary fix (since new
"wrong" URLs can be added at any time). Anyone consuming OSM data must
be able to work with URLs that miss a schema, and indeed today any
browser can do that.

So what your edit does is, it "touches" lots of objects and adds no
meaningful information whatsoever. It creates load on the database; it
creates a new version of every object you touch which, informationally
speaking, is identical to the old version. It produces larger diff
files, larger history files, and on top of that runs the risk of making
data look more current than it is ("oh, this pub has last been changed
by someone two months ago, so surely it will still be in business" when
in fact the last OSMer who saw that pub with their own eyes did so five
years ago).

There are many, many better ways to contribute to OSM than runnning a
useless automated conformity edit. Take a notebook or mobile editor, go
outside, check if the phone booths on OSM are still there on the ground,
add a few opening times, or even trees for that matter - a single hour
of such original work is more useful to OSM that what you are proposing
here.

Remember: OSM is not an IT project.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-28 Thread Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

Thanks for your replies!

Regarding the question of why I am proposing to fix only pubs in this run.
I think it would be good to try this script with a reduced scope of nodes
first before raising a more global conversation. I imagine changesets will
be easy to retrieve and un-do.

Worth mentioning that, for the majority of the nodes affected, the websites
are not incorrect per-se, but they are not URLs because they miss a scheme.
This will cause problems to consumers depending on how they use the field
(I first noticed this issue when passing the :website tag to a third party
library which complained about this)

I ran the script on a local database and I have some numbers:

For a total of 159 :amenity=pub nodes with missing scheme on their :website

- 41 (~26%) can be updated with https as a scheme (safer for the end-user)
- 92 (~58%) don't work on https but http can be added as a scheme
- 26 (~16%) seem to be offline, not accessible neither on http or https
(maybe they can be automatically tagged for fixing? thoughts?)

How do I proceed from here? I have a small subset of nodes to test the
proposal with, I have tried the script locally with good results and I
believe the proposal makes the dataset better for consumers and safer for
end-users by adding an https URL to websites that support it

--
Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

w: http://rodrigodiez.io
t: @rodrigodiez_pro
p: 00 44 7513 638225



On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 at 19:38, Andrew Hain 
wrote:

> Keep Right flags web links that have gone offline.
>
> --
> Andrew
> --
> *From:* Philip Barnes 
> *Sent:* 27 September 2020 18:49
> *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add
> missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites
>
> On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 16:28 +0100, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and to
> thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!
>
> After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as a
> contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.
>
> Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a
> proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community
> conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on the
> way. Be merciful! :P
>
> To the point now.
>
> I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with amenity:pub)
> for a pet project.
>
> When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a
> website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).
>
> Ie: www.mypub.com rather than http://www.mypub.com or
> https://www.mypub.com
>
> This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website.
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website>
>
> I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these nodes
> to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the nodes.
>
> I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it here
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/rodrigodiez/Add_missing_URL_scheme_to_pub_websites_in_UK>
> .
>
> Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your
> feedback, comments and advises on how to proceed from here
>
> One issue I can think of with pubs and websites is that they need checking
> to ensure they are still current.
>
> The defacto method most pubs use to communicate with customers is facebook.
>
> A more general fix of urls missing http(s)://, why only pubs?.  is
> probably a maproulette quest.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
> ___
> 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] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-27 Thread Andrew Hain

Keep Right flags web links that have gone offline.

--
Andrew

From: Philip Barnes 
Sent: 27 September 2020 18:49
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing 
URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 16:28 +0100, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
Hi all,

First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and to thank 
you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!

After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as a 
contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.

Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a proposal 
and, although I have done my best reading the community conventions and best 
practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on the way. Be merciful! :P

To the point now.

I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with amenity:pub) for a 
pet project.

When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a website: 
tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).

Ie: www.mypub.com<http://www.mypub.com> rather than http://www.mypub.com or 
https://www.mypub.com

This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for 
website.<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website>

I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these nodes to 
find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the nodes.

I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it 
here<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/rodrigodiez/Add_missing_URL_scheme_to_pub_websites_in_UK>.

Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your feedback, 
comments and advises on how to proceed from here

One issue I can think of with pubs and websites is that they need checking to 
ensure they are still current.

The defacto method most pubs use to communicate with customers is facebook.

A more general fix of urls missing http(s)://, why only pubs?.  is probably a 
maproulette quest.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-27 Thread Philip Barnes

On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 16:28 +0100, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and
> to thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!
> 
> After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step
> as a contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.
> 
> Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with
> a proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community
> conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes
> on the way. Be merciful! :P
> 
> To the point now.
> 
> I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with
> amenity:pub) for a pet project.
> 
> When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a
> website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema
> (http/https).
> 
> Ie: www.mypub.com rather than http://www.mypub.com or 
> https://www.mypub.com
> 
> This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website.
> 
> I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these
> nodes to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag
> the nodes.
> 
> I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it
> here.
> 
> Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your
> feedback, comments and advises on how to proceed from here
> 
One issue I can think of with pubs and websites is that they need
checking to ensure they are still current. 

The defacto method most pubs use to communicate with customers is
facebook.

A more general fix of urls missing http(s)://, why only pubs?.  is
probably a maproulette quest.

Phil (trigpoint)


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

[Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

2020-09-27 Thread Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

Hi all,

First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and to
thank you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!

After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as a
contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.

Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a
proposal and, although I have done my best reading the community
conventions and best practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on the
way. Be merciful! :P

To the point now.

I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with amenity:pub)
for a pet project.

When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a
website: tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).

Ie: www.mypub.com rather than http://www.mypub.com or https://www.mypub.com

This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for website.


I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these nodes
to find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the nodes.

I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it here

.

Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your
feedback, comments and advises on how to proceed from here

Thanks in advance!








--
Rodrigo Díez Villamuera

w: http://rodrigodiez.io
t: @rodrigodiez_pro
p: 00 44 7513 638225
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-25 Thread Pepe Valverde de la Vera

Hay gente que no se entera o no se quiere enterar, coincido Diego contigo,

pd.: Supongo que su respuesta airada no se hará esperar. No se preocupe,
encajo bien. De todas formas aquí termino, no pienso gastar ni un minuto
más con usted.

He incluso se me ocurren palabras mas gruesas pero como decia mi abuelo
intentar que ciertas personas entiendan lo evidente a veces es perder
tiempo, dinero y categoria.

Hasta aqui con este asunto.

Pepe

El sáb., 25 ene. 2020 9:34, Diego García  escribió:

> Esto ya es surrealista.
>
> ¿Usted a qué ha venido por aquí? ¿A mapear o a sacarnos de la ignorancia,
> como en el 1808? ¿Cuántos años lleva usted viviendo aquí como para
> discutirnos? ¿Conoce mínimamente la realidad de España, o sólo lo que
> encuentra por internet? Se está retratando usted solito. Se lo pido por
> favor: deje de hostigar a toda una comunidad nacional, le invito a irse por
> donde ha venido, déjenos en paz. Hay muchas cosas para editar en su propio
> terreno si le parece bien. O en el Congo Belga, o en Laponia. La wiki de
> OSM me han dicho que está muy bien en esta época del año.
>
> Disculpe la ocurrencia, no es mi estilo en público. Pero la paciencia
> tiene un límite muy fino, y usted se lo lleva saltando desde hace demasiado
> tiempo.
>
>
> Un saludo, a todos menos a uno,
>
> Diego
>
> pd.: Supongo que su respuesta airada no se hará esperar. No se preocupe,
> encajo bien. De todas formas aquí termino, no pienso gastar ni un minuto
> más con usted.
>
> El sáb., 25 ene. 2020 a las 6:05, Philippe Verdy ()
> escribió:
>
>> Another reading if you've missed that Aragonese law:
>>
>> (Boletín Oficial de Aragón n°149, 2006-12-30, Gobierno de Aragón).
>>
>> Decreto legislativo 2/2006 de 27 de diciembre del Gobierno de Aragón por
>> el que se aprueba el texto refundido de la Ley de Comarcalización de Aragón
>>
>> http://www.boa.aragon.es/cgi-bin/BRSCGI?CMD=VEROBJ=167404590505
>>
>> Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 03:01, Alejandro S.  a
 écrit :

> Dear Phillipe,
>
> I've been living in Zaragoza (Aragón, Spain) for 27 years. Please,
> don't tell I don't know what a Comarca is.
>
> I think Pepe has been pretty clear telling us the laws regarding this
> issue:
>
> *"Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen
> Local, es la que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de
> este país. Y es clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere:
> Pais, Comunidad Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y
> Entidad Local Menor a municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas
> Locales, Pedanias, Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el resto
> no son más que divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos generalmente
> para optimizar sus medios y servicios y no pueden estar en estos niveles
> pues legalmente no existen."*
>
> I'm not sure if we're just overthinking or feeding a troll.
>
> Best regards,
> Yonseca.
>

>> These evidences above (including the names of documents, their dates, and
>> assertable links that any one can see easily) were already made before, but
>> you did not care about reading them. Think twice before accusing someone of
>> "trolling".
>>
>> So I supposed you just lived in Aragon *before* February 2006 and have
>> not seen what happened there after you left. Or you are not jut interested
>> yourself by this subject which others consider useful and are legitimate in
>> OSM (and if you still don't trust what was put in OSM, you can compare with
>> the published open data of these administrations).
>>
>> An official comarcalization occured also in Galicia, but Catalunya was
>> the first to make it official at regional level.
>> The juntas of provinces have still not understood that, they contiunue to
>> use their own touristic comarcas, or may maintain them only as statistical
>> units for reasons of continuity over a period long enough to be able to
>> report analyze the evolutions. But provinces have no statistics intitutes.
>> Aragon has its own official statistics institute (IEAST, whose website is
>> for now the same as the Gobernatio).
>>
>> The Spanish State government is also late on this in its ministerios and
>> othert state agencies (but the state government make that for other
>> planning purposes, not to rule what and how comarcas are regionally
>> organized, because it is not the competence of these adminsitrations, they
>> have no power to create or change them officially and give them a judicial
>> identity or any form of autonomy; only the Spanish parliament *may*
>> eventually do that, but it won't be consititutionally able to legiferate on
>> domains whose competence were transfered to the autonomous communities,
>> without negociating with their respective governments).
>>
>> The question is not if those comarcas should exist or not. Of course they
>> should be there. It's only a problem for defining a tagging system,

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-25 Thread Diego García

Esto ya es surrealista.

¿Usted a qué ha venido por aquí? ¿A mapear o a sacarnos de la ignorancia,
como en el 1808? ¿Cuántos años lleva usted viviendo aquí como para
discutirnos? ¿Conoce mínimamente la realidad de España, o sólo lo que
encuentra por internet? Se está retratando usted solito. Se lo pido por
favor: deje de hostigar a toda una comunidad nacional, le invito a irse por
donde ha venido, déjenos en paz. Hay muchas cosas para editar en su propio
terreno si le parece bien. O en el Congo Belga, o en Laponia. La wiki de
OSM me han dicho que está muy bien en esta época del año.

Disculpe la ocurrencia, no es mi estilo en público. Pero la paciencia tiene
un límite muy fino, y usted se lo lleva saltando desde hace demasiado
tiempo.


Un saludo, a todos menos a uno,

Diego

pd.: Supongo que su respuesta airada no se hará esperar. No se preocupe,
encajo bien. De todas formas aquí termino, no pienso gastar ni un minuto
más con usted.

El sáb., 25 ene. 2020 a las 6:05, Philippe Verdy ()
escribió:

> Another reading if you've missed that Aragonese law:
>
> (Boletín Oficial de Aragón n°149, 2006-12-30, Gobierno de Aragón).
>
> Decreto legislativo 2/2006 de 27 de diciembre del Gobierno de Aragón por
> el que se aprueba el texto refundido de la Ley de Comarcalización de Aragón
>
> http://www.boa.aragon.es/cgi-bin/BRSCGI?CMD=VEROBJ=167404590505
>
> Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 03:01, Alejandro S.  a écrit :
>>>
 Dear Phillipe,

 I've been living in Zaragoza (Aragón, Spain) for 27 years. Please,
 don't tell I don't know what a Comarca is.

 I think Pepe has been pretty clear telling us the laws regarding this
 issue:

 *"Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen Local,
 es la que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de este país.
 Y es clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere: Pais, Comunidad
 Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y Entidad Local Menor a
 municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas Locales, Pedanias,
 Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el resto no son más que
 divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos generalmente para optimizar sus
 medios y servicios y no pueden estar en estos niveles pues legalmente no
 existen."*

 I'm not sure if we're just overthinking or feeding a troll.

 Best regards,
 Yonseca.

>>>
> These evidences above (including the names of documents, their dates, and
> assertable links that any one can see easily) were already made before, but
> you did not care about reading them. Think twice before accusing someone of
> "trolling".
>
> So I supposed you just lived in Aragon *before* February 2006 and have not
> seen what happened there after you left. Or you are not jut interested
> yourself by this subject which others consider useful and are legitimate in
> OSM (and if you still don't trust what was put in OSM, you can compare with
> the published open data of these administrations).
>
> An official comarcalization occured also in Galicia, but Catalunya was the
> first to make it official at regional level.
> The juntas of provinces have still not understood that, they contiunue to
> use their own touristic comarcas, or may maintain them only as statistical
> units for reasons of continuity over a period long enough to be able to
> report analyze the evolutions. But provinces have no statistics intitutes.
> Aragon has its own official statistics institute (IEAST, whose website is
> for now the same as the Gobernatio).
>
> The Spanish State government is also late on this in its ministerios and
> othert state agencies (but the state government make that for other
> planning purposes, not to rule what and how comarcas are regionally
> organized, because it is not the competence of these adminsitrations, they
> have no power to create or change them officially and give them a judicial
> identity or any form of autonomy; only the Spanish parliament *may*
> eventually do that, but it won't be consititutionally able to legiferate on
> domains whose competence were transfered to the autonomous communities,
> without negociating with their respective governments).
>
> The question is not if those comarcas should exist or not. Of course they
> should be there. It's only a problem for defining a tagging system, and
> using it coherently (something that is incoherent today, but there's no
> alternative documentation: someone must do the hard job of first sorting
> things to avoid incoherences, then apply the tags, that this list may
> discuss, but has to document somewhere without just placing an informal
> link to the Spanish Wikipedia article where nothing is coherent or well
> defined as the topic is clearly still not understood by most Spaniards that
> have contributed to it; the situation is even worse in Wikimedia Commons
> with lot of incohrent and undated "maps" and that was then transfered as is
> from

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

Another reading if you've missed that Aragonese law:

(Boletín Oficial de Aragón n°149, 2006-12-30, Gobierno de Aragón).

Decreto legislativo 2/2006 de 27 de diciembre del Gobierno de Aragón por el
que se aprueba el texto refundido de la Ley de Comarcalización de Aragón

http://www.boa.aragon.es/cgi-bin/BRSCGI?CMD=VEROBJ=167404590505

Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 03:01, Alejandro S.  a écrit :
>>
>>> Dear Phillipe,
>>>
>>> I've been living in Zaragoza (Aragón, Spain) for 27 years. Please, don't
>>> tell I don't know what a Comarca is.
>>>
>>> I think Pepe has been pretty clear telling us the laws regarding this
>>> issue:
>>>
>>> *"Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen Local,
>>> es la que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de este país.
>>> Y es clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere: Pais, Comunidad
>>> Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y Entidad Local Menor a
>>> municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas Locales, Pedanias,
>>> Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el resto no son más que
>>> divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos generalmente para optimizar sus
>>> medios y servicios y no pueden estar en estos niveles pues legalmente no
>>> existen."*
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if we're just overthinking or feeding a troll.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Yonseca.
>>>
>>
These evidences above (including the names of documents, their dates, and
assertable links that any one can see easily) were already made before, but
you did not care about reading them. Think twice before accusing someone of
"trolling".

So I supposed you just lived in Aragon *before* February 2006 and have not
seen what happened there after you left. Or you are not jut interested
yourself by this subject which others consider useful and are legitimate in
OSM (and if you still don't trust what was put in OSM, you can compare with
the published open data of these administrations).

An official comarcalization occured also in Galicia, but Catalunya was the
first to make it official at regional level.
The juntas of provinces have still not understood that, they contiunue to
use their own touristic comarcas, or may maintain them only as statistical
units for reasons of continuity over a period long enough to be able to
report analyze the evolutions. But provinces have no statistics intitutes.
Aragon has its own official statistics institute (IEAST, whose website is
for now the same as the Gobernatio).

The Spanish State government is also late on this in its ministerios and
othert state agencies (but the state government make that for other
planning purposes, not to rule what and how comarcas are regionally
organized, because it is not the competence of these adminsitrations, they
have no power to create or change them officially and give them a judicial
identity or any form of autonomy; only the Spanish parliament *may*
eventually do that, but it won't be consititutionally able to legiferate on
domains whose competence were transfered to the autonomous communities,
without negociating with their respective governments).

The question is not if those comarcas should exist or not. Of course they
should be there. It's only a problem for defining a tagging system, and
using it coherently (something that is incoherent today, but there's no
alternative documentation: someone must do the hard job of first sorting
things to avoid incoherences, then apply the tags, that this list may
discuss, but has to document somewhere without just placing an informal
link to the Spanish Wikipedia article where nothing is coherent or well
defined as the topic is clearly still not understood by most Spaniards that
have contributed to it; the situation is even worse in Wikimedia Commons
with lot of incohrent and undated "maps" and that was then transfered as is
from Commons to Wikidata which also includes various incoherent
categorization from ES.WP where all is mixed, including historical units
that certainly have their place in Wikipedia but not in OSM which should
*first* reflect what is in current use today).
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

The " Instituto Aragonés de Estadística (IAEST) - Territorio y transportes"
explicitly says:

[quote]
La comarca es una entidad local territorial, con personalidad jurídica
propia, que goza de capacidad y autonomía para el cumplimiento de sus
fines, y con competencias propias.

Se muestra la relación de municipios que conforman cada una de las
comarcas/delimitaciones comarcales de Aragón. Para cada comarca se incluye
su código, denominación, los municipios que la componen (código municipal y
denominación del municipio), nombre de la provincia y código de provincia.
También se hace referencia de las leyes de creación de cada una de las
comarcas.

Las modificaciones que se produzcan se incorporarán a la base de datos una
vez que sean oficiales. La información se muestra de forma conjunta para
todo Aragón y también por comarcas para facilitar el acceso al usuario.

Tabla de informes de comarcas
Estadística local: ámbito comarcal y municipal
[/quote]

These are not just statistical units, they have a juridical identity and
their autonomy, they are officially encoded by IAEST (with the same numbers
as those used in the Aragonese law of comarcalization).

You've not lived in Aragon for long enough or was not aware of that fact
when you lived there (or did not care about it at that time).

Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 05:30, Philippe Verdy  a écrit :

> https://www.aragon.es/-/comarcas
>
> A troll made by Aragon itself ?
>
> Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 03:01, Alejandro S.  a écrit :
>
>> Dear Phillipe,
>>
>> I've been living in Zaragoza (Aragón, Spain) for 27 years. Please, don't
>> tell I don't know what a Comarca is.
>>
>> I think Pepe has been pretty clear telling us the laws regarding this
>> issue:
>>
>> *"Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen Local,
>> es la que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de este país.
>> Y es clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere: Pais, Comunidad
>> Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y Entidad Local Menor a
>> municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas Locales, Pedanias,
>> Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el resto no son más que
>> divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos generalmente para optimizar sus
>> medios y servicios y no pueden estar en estos niveles pues legalmente no
>> existen."*
>>
>> I'm not sure if we're just overthinking or feeding a troll.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Yonseca.
>>
>>
>> El 25/1/20 a las 1:48, Philippe Verdy escribió:
>>
>> That's only the situation for Spain as a whole. The situation is more
>> complex because Spain has recongized the status of autonomy of its
>> communities, in legal texts that include also the comarcas.
>> So the autonomous communities have power to create them. And this has
>> been then used by them or their provinces. It has also been used by the
>> Spanish government.
>> There are then several comarcal definitions used administratively, but
>> dirrefecntly depending on the administration that defines and used them.
>>
>> Calalunya was the first to take a law of comarcalisation to unify the
>> comarcal delimiation, it has been followed by Galicia and Aragon. Comarcas
>> are still used elsewhere but not unified, and present (differently) in open
>> data sets from various administrations (provinces essentially for touristic
>> development, autonomous communities, Spanish ministries like MAPA for the
>> agrarian comarcas, and another type of comarca, forestry comarcas...)
>>
>> All these definitions are created in the scope of the missions each
>> administration can work on. For example provinces are competent for
>> touristic and cultural development. auytonomous communities have their
>> domain of competence on which the Spanish government cannot enact directly.
>> As well the municipalities themselves have the power to organize themselves
>> and have grouped themsevles into mancomunidades, more or less based (but
>> not necessarily) on comarcas.
>>
>> So comarcas (different kinds) are existing in Spain, just like
>> mancomunidades, even if they are not part of the basic national law. They
>> should be in OSM. But visibly even the Spanish people are confused about
>> their status (and this is reflected by the way comarcas are described in
>> Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Commons by their existing Spanish commjnity:
>> everything is mixed. and I'm not considering the "natural" comarcas (which,
>> in Wikidata should only be considered as "geographic regions" not as
>> administrative comarcas of Spain), or "cultural/historic" comarcas that
>> also add up to the count.
>>
>> But that I did not create these two (if they were mapped in OSM, their
>> boundaries would be extremely fuzzy as the historic and culural comarcas
>> were based on groups of villages before thee creation of municipalities and
>> the delimitation of municipal boundaries: some municipaltiies would have to
>> be split to match the historic definitions (the cultural comarcas would
>>

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

https://www.aragon.es/-/comarcas

A troll made by Aragon itself ?

Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 03:01, Alejandro S.  a écrit :

> Dear Phillipe,
>
> I've been living in Zaragoza (Aragón, Spain) for 27 years. Please, don't
> tell I don't know what a Comarca is.
>
> I think Pepe has been pretty clear telling us the laws regarding this
> issue:
>
> *"Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen Local, es
> la que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de este país. Y
> es clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere: Pais, Comunidad
> Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y Entidad Local Menor a
> municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas Locales, Pedanias,
> Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el resto no son más que
> divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos generalmente para optimizar sus
> medios y servicios y no pueden estar en estos niveles pues legalmente no
> existen."*
>
> I'm not sure if we're just overthinking or feeding a troll.
>
> Best regards,
> Yonseca.
>
>
> El 25/1/20 a las 1:48, Philippe Verdy escribió:
>
> That's only the situation for Spain as a whole. The situation is more
> complex because Spain has recongized the status of autonomy of its
> communities, in legal texts that include also the comarcas.
> So the autonomous communities have power to create them. And this has been
> then used by them or their provinces. It has also been used by the Spanish
> government.
> There are then several comarcal definitions used administratively, but
> dirrefecntly depending on the administration that defines and used them.
>
> Calalunya was the first to take a law of comarcalisation to unify the
> comarcal delimiation, it has been followed by Galicia and Aragon. Comarcas
> are still used elsewhere but not unified, and present (differently) in open
> data sets from various administrations (provinces essentially for touristic
> development, autonomous communities, Spanish ministries like MAPA for the
> agrarian comarcas, and another type of comarca, forestry comarcas...)
>
> All these definitions are created in the scope of the missions each
> administration can work on. For example provinces are competent for
> touristic and cultural development. auytonomous communities have their
> domain of competence on which the Spanish government cannot enact directly.
> As well the municipalities themselves have the power to organize themselves
> and have grouped themsevles into mancomunidades, more or less based (but
> not necessarily) on comarcas.
>
> So comarcas (different kinds) are existing in Spain, just like
> mancomunidades, even if they are not part of the basic national law. They
> should be in OSM. But visibly even the Spanish people are confused about
> their status (and this is reflected by the way comarcas are described in
> Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Commons by their existing Spanish commjnity:
> everything is mixed. and I'm not considering the "natural" comarcas (which,
> in Wikidata should only be considered as "geographic regions" not as
> administrative comarcas of Spain), or "cultural/historic" comarcas that
> also add up to the count.
>
> But that I did not create these two (if they were mapped in OSM, their
> boundaries would be extremely fuzzy as the historic and culural comarcas
> were based on groups of villages before thee creation of municipalities and
> the delimitation of municipal boundaries: some municipaltiies would have to
> be split to match the historic definitions (the cultural comarcas would
> also have to include some various enclaves that municipalities have created
> in surrounding comarcas): in OSM we could only map these cultural comarcas
> as "boundary=historic", and natural comarcas as "boundary=natural?" or just
> multipolygons with place=* but not any administrartive status (as long
> there's no Spanish adminsitration defining and using them).
>
> Beside that, there are other kinds of areas which may be perceived by some
> as comarcas, but are not, like functional areas (in Catalunya, they are
> defined by local law and used by the Catalan authorities to group their
> official comarcas; in the Balearic islands there are island councils; they
> are not comarcas but mapped as other "political" entities with their own
> political types; elsewhere they don't seem to exist).
>
> Finally to add to the complexity, there are 3 linguistic areas in Navarra
> (they were created by someone else as "poltitical" boundaries).
>
> There are also some isolated municipalities in Spain that were mapped in
> OSM using "political" boundaries for their submunicipal divisions, instead
> of admin_levels 9/10 like the surrounding municipalities.
>
> Another municipality in Spain had its census divisions mapped as
> "boundary=political" (with no other distinguishing tags) instead of
> "boundary=statistics". These have no distinguished names, their given
> "name=*" tag is descriptive only and are all the same (the name of

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-24 Thread Alejandro S.


Dear Phillipe,

I've been living in Zaragoza (Aragón, Spain) for 27 years. Please, don't 
tell I don't know what a Comarca is.


I think Pepe has been pretty clear telling us the laws regarding this issue:

/"Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen Local, 
es la que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de este 
país. Y es clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere: Pais, 
Comunidad Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y Entidad 
Local Menor a municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas 
Locales, Pedanias, Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el 
resto no son más que divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos 
generalmente para optimizar sus medios y servicios y no pueden estar en 
estos niveles pues legalmente no existen."/


I'm not sure if we're just overthinking or feeding a troll.

Best regards,
Yonseca.


El 25/1/20 a las 1:48, Philippe Verdy escribió:
That's only the situation for Spain as a whole. The situation is more 
complex because Spain has recongized the status of autonomy of its 
communities, in legal texts that include also the comarcas.
So the autonomous communities have power to create them. And this has 
been then used by them or their provinces. It has also been used by 
the Spanish government.
There are then several comarcal definitions used administratively, but 
dirrefecntly depending on the administration that defines and used them.


Calalunya was the first to take a law of comarcalisation to unify the 
comarcal delimiation, it has been followed by Galicia and Aragon. 
Comarcas are still used elsewhere but not unified, and present 
(differently) in open data sets from various administrations 
(provinces essentially for touristic development, autonomous 
communities, Spanish ministries like MAPA for the agrarian comarcas, 
and another type of comarca, forestry comarcas...)


All these definitions are created in the scope of the missions each 
administration can work on. For example provinces are competent for 
touristic and cultural development. auytonomous communities have their 
domain of competence on which the Spanish government cannot enact 
directly. As well the municipalities themselves have the power to 
organize themselves and have grouped themsevles into mancomunidades, 
more or less based (but not necessarily) on comarcas.


So comarcas (different kinds) are existing in Spain, just like 
mancomunidades, even if they are not part of the basic national law. 
They should be in OSM. But visibly even the Spanish people are 
confused about their status (and this is reflected by the way comarcas 
are described in Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Commons by their existing 
Spanish commjnity: everything is mixed. and I'm not considering the 
"natural" comarcas (which, in Wikidata should only be considered as 
"geographic regions" not as administrative comarcas of Spain), or 
"cultural/historic" comarcas that also add up to the count.


But that I did not create these two (if they were mapped in OSM, their 
boundaries would be extremely fuzzy as the historic and culural 
comarcas were based on groups of villages before thee creation of 
municipalities and the delimitation of municipal boundaries: some 
municipaltiies would have to be split to match the historic 
definitions (the cultural comarcas would also have to include some 
various enclaves that municipalities have created in surrounding 
comarcas): in OSM we could only map these cultural comarcas as 
"boundary=historic", and natural comarcas as "boundary=natural?" or 
just multipolygons with place=* but not any administrartive status (as 
long there's no Spanish adminsitration defining and using them).


Beside that, there are other kinds of areas which may be perceived by 
some as comarcas, but are not, like functional areas (in Catalunya, 
they are defined by local law and used by the Catalan authorities to 
group their official comarcas; in the Balearic islands there are 
island councils; they are not comarcas but mapped as other "political" 
entities with their own political types; elsewhere they don't seem to 
exist).


Finally to add to the complexity, there are 3 linguistic areas in 
Navarra (they were created by someone else as "poltitical" boundaries).


There are also some isolated municipalities in Spain that were mapped 
in OSM using "political" boundaries for their submunicipal divisions, 
instead of admin_levels 9/10 like the surrounding municipalities.


Another municipality in Spain had its census divisions mapped as 
"boundary=political" (with no other distinguishing tags) instead of 
"boundary=statistics". These have no distinguished names, their given 
"name=*" tag is descriptive only and are all the same (the name of the 
municipality, a description they are census division, with just a 
different number appended).


Sorry, but this is not my mess ! Consider all this. Really various 
users have attempted to map differnt things for

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

That's only the situation for Spain as a whole. The situation is more
complex because Spain has recongized the status of autonomy of its
communities, in legal texts that include also the comarcas.
So the autonomous communities have power to create them. And this has been
then used by them or their provinces. It has also been used by the Spanish
government.
There are then several comarcal definitions used administratively, but
dirrefecntly depending on the administration that defines and used them.

Calalunya was the first to take a law of comarcalisation to unify the
comarcal delimiation, it has been followed by Galicia and Aragon. Comarcas
are still used elsewhere but not unified, and present (differently) in open
data sets from various administrations (provinces essentially for touristic
development, autonomous communities, Spanish ministries like MAPA for the
agrarian comarcas, and another type of comarca, forestry comarcas...)

All these definitions are created in the scope of the missions each
administration can work on. For example provinces are competent for
touristic and cultural development. auytonomous communities have their
domain of competence on which the Spanish government cannot enact directly.
As well the municipalities themselves have the power to organize themselves
and have grouped themsevles into mancomunidades, more or less based (but
not necessarily) on comarcas.

So comarcas (different kinds) are existing in Spain, just like
mancomunidades, even if they are not part of the basic national law. They
should be in OSM. But visibly even the Spanish people are confused about
their status (and this is reflected by the way comarcas are described in
Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Commons by their existing Spanish commjnity:
everything is mixed. and I'm not considering the "natural" comarcas (which,
in Wikidata should only be considered as "geographic regions" not as
administrative comarcas of Spain), or "cultural/historic" comarcas that
also add up to the count.

But that I did not create these two (if they were mapped in OSM, their
boundaries would be extremely fuzzy as the historic and culural comarcas
were based on groups of villages before thee creation of municipalities and
the delimitation of municipal boundaries: some municipaltiies would have to
be split to match the historic definitions (the cultural comarcas would
also have to include some various enclaves that municipalities have created
in surrounding comarcas): in OSM we could only map these cultural comarcas
as "boundary=historic", and natural comarcas as "boundary=natural?" or just
multipolygons with place=* but not any administrartive status (as long
there's no Spanish adminsitration defining and using them).

Beside that, there are other kinds of areas which may be perceived by some
as comarcas, but are not, like functional areas (in Catalunya, they are
defined by local law and used by the Catalan authorities to group their
official comarcas; in the Balearic islands there are island councils; they
are not comarcas but mapped as other "political" entities with their own
political types; elsewhere they don't seem to exist).

Finally to add to the complexity, there are 3 linguistic areas in Navarra
(they were created by someone else as "poltitical" boundaries).

There are also some isolated municipalities in Spain that were mapped in
OSM using "political" boundaries for their submunicipal divisions, instead
of admin_levels 9/10 like the surrounding municipalities.

Another municipality in Spain had its census divisions mapped as
"boundary=political" (with no other distinguishing tags) instead of
"boundary=statistics". These have no distinguished names, their given
"name=*" tag is descriptive only and are all the same (the name of the
municipality, a description they are census division, with just a different
number appended).

Sorry, but this is not my mess ! Consider all this. Really various users
have attempted to map differnt things for different needs (they are
legitimate), but they were not discussed as well, not documented. The OSM
wiki itself does not document anything about comarcas because it only links
to a fuzzy general article on Wikipedia for comarcas. So various users have
used this mere assumption in the OSM wiki as valid. But the single OSM wiki
page that links comarcas at admin_level 7 is in row of a table describing
the divisions of Spain: that row contains also an indication that this is
"proposed".

Admin levels in Spain (and other boundary types: political, health,
judiciary, mancomunidades, statistics, and even submunicipal divisions)
have never been seriously discussed and documented. That's something you
must work on. The needs are demonstrated, there's clearly more than just
CCAA, provinces and municipalities and there are serious open data sets
from multiple official administrative sources in Spain that define and use
them. All what is missing,is to agree on which tags to use to distinguish
them and clarify

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-24 Thread Pepe Valverde de la Vera

Esto es increible. ¿Como es posible que andemos todavia dandole vueltas a
este asunto?.

En otros lugares no tengo ni idea pues bastante tenemos con aclararnos en
la diversidad de las 17 España.

Oficialmente, insisto, oficialmente la Ley de Bases de Regimen Local, es la
que especifica la division territorial y administrativa de este país. Y es
clara en su articulado en lo que a limites se refiere: Pais, Comunidad
Autónoma y Ciudades Autónomas, Provincia, Municipio y Entidad Local Menor a
municipio (las conocidas como Juntas Administativas Locales, Pedanias,
Poblados, e incluso Parroquias o anteiglesias) el resto no son más que
divisiones de gestión de diferentes organos generalmente para optimizar sus
medios y servicios y no pueden estar en estos niveles pues legalmente no
existen. Otra cosa es que DECIDAMOS en algunos casos representar esos
limites de gestión, pero que en mi modesto entender, habria que establecer
otros parametros diferentes a los de limites territoriales pues no lo son.

En otro orden de cosas, estan los enclaves, el más conocido el de Treviño,
pero que solo en la provincia de Burgos puede haber una docena y en
particular con las vecinas Palencia y Cantabria. Se podrian definir como
"islas" de un territorio provincial dentro de otra provincia y por tanto
afecta también a las comunidades autónomas a las que pertenecen. El caso
más afamado es el de Treviño, como ya se ha dicho, pero justo al lado
tenemos un caso similar en extensión y caracteristicas y que ademas afecta
a tres provincias y a tres CCAA, es el municipio de Miranda de Ebro, del
que no se habla pero es aun si cabe mas singular.

En cuanto a las comarcas la legislación vigente es la que corresponde a
cada CCAA y por tanto no existe un criterio generalizado. NO SE PUEDE
CONFUNDIR COMARCA COMO ENTE SINGULAR ADMUNISTRATIVO Y TERRITORIAL (La
Bañeza por ejemplo) con otras agrupaciones territoriales que no tienen ese
estatus aunque se denominen comarcas agrarias, comarca natural, comarca
industrial y que serian instancias similares a un Partido Judicial o un
Arciprestazgo, division administrativa similar a la comarca de ambito
religioso por lo tanto privado y que si tiene una representacion continua
en todo el territorio, PERO NO SON COMARCAS. Otro ejemplo son las
confederaciones hidrográficas, tambien tienen demarcación territorial,
incluso coincidente en algun caso con una comarca (valle del Jerte) pero NO
SON COMARCAS.

Si se ha de representar cualquiera de estas cosas deberia hacerse como he
dicho con nuevas etiquetas diferenciadas y POR CONSENSO todo lo demas
deberia, a mi juicio, REVERTIRSE.
Si ademas se actua de forma unulateral y sin la aprobscion o los criterios
de cada territorio se deberia actuar como en casos similares de ediciones
fuera de las normas.

Esa es mi opinión, salvo caso de otra mejor fundada y fundamentada en mas
de 30 años de experiencia en este mundo de propiedades, territorio y
mojones.

Salud,

Pepe

El jue., 23 ene. 2020 1:31, Philippe Verdy  escribió:

>
>
> Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 20:57, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso 
> a écrit :
>
>> No he dicho que te inventaras "Enclave de Treviño", sino que el que este
>> ese bien o mal puesto no te da derecho para inventarte otros nombres. El
>> que te has inventado es «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro»
>>
>> Como no hay admin_level7 en España cojo me lo invento y que se aguantes
>> los Españoles. Ole tú. Gran argumento el tuyo. ¿Y si no existe, cómo lo
>> quieres poner, que en gran parte de España parece que es el
>> caso?¿imponiéndolo? Esto es lo que se te lleva explicando desde el minuto 1
>> pero en vez de dialogar impones que se pone lo que tu dices, como tu dices.
>>
>
> Clamos ! I'm not alone to have created such mixed and unqualified things
> at admin_level 7, because the OSM documentation wiki was not clear at all.
> They were spread by multiple users (not just me) that created them over
> time without consiudering this was an issue and without asking here.
>
> It's not the fact they they do not exist, but they are ambiguously tagged
> and largely incomplete (when in fact they come from administrative sources
> that are complete in their relevant area of coverage). In OSM this was
> largely an unfinished subset of data that has never been usable for any
> purpose.
>
> I do not impose the tagging, I just created one that hoped to be coherent
> by itself and tried to sort the mess. But it remains unfinished. This is
> still a "work in progress"... And I used the correct sources or what
> appeared to be the existing consensus (anyway Spanish users do not seem to
> have properly sortted things as well in Wikipedia, Commons and Wikidata).
> Someboday must start "doing the hard job" and find these incoherences. That
> was me, and of course I'm exposed to critics, but not opposed to changes
> and better suggestions, and I'm very open to them. If I make errors I can
> and will fix them.
>
> It's a fact that even if these comarcas are not officialized by the
>

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 20:57, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso 
a écrit :

> No he dicho que te inventaras "Enclave de Treviño", sino que el que este
> ese bien o mal puesto no te da derecho para inventarte otros nombres. El
> que te has inventado es «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro»
>
> Como no hay admin_level7 en España cojo me lo invento y que se aguantes
> los Españoles. Ole tú. Gran argumento el tuyo. ¿Y si no existe, cómo lo
> quieres poner, que en gran parte de España parece que es el
> caso?¿imponiéndolo? Esto es lo que se te lleva explicando desde el minuto 1
> pero en vez de dialogar impones que se pone lo que tu dices, como tu dices.
>

Clamos ! I'm not alone to have created such mixed and unqualified things at
admin_level 7, because the OSM documentation wiki was not clear at all.
They were spread by multiple users (not just me) that created them over
time without consiudering this was an issue and without asking here.

It's not the fact they they do not exist, but they are ambiguously tagged
and largely incomplete (when in fact they come from administrative sources
that are complete in their relevant area of coverage). In OSM this was
largely an unfinished subset of data that has never been usable for any
purpose.

I do not impose the tagging, I just created one that hoped to be coherent
by itself and tried to sort the mess. But it remains unfinished. This is
still a "work in progress"... And I used the correct sources or what
appeared to be the existing consensus (anyway Spanish users do not seem to
have properly sortted things as well in Wikipedia, Commons and Wikidata).
Someboday must start "doing the hard job" and find these incoherences. That
was me, and of course I'm exposed to critics, but not opposed to changes
and better suggestions, and I'm very open to them. If I make errors I can
and will fix them.

It's a fact that even if these comarcas are not officialized by the
autonomous communities, they are officialized by a Spanish administration
(provinces, ministries, state agencies) for their domain of use, so they
exist (even in their own open data sets) and they are expected to be
present in OSM (otherwise other Spanish users wouldn't have created some of
them, but left the situation unfinished and incoherent, so they were still
not usable). Those administrations unfortunately designate them as
"comarca", but if you read their sources correctly, the term "comarca" is
not used alone and is qualified.
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

OK this object is removed (it had no tags qualifying it as a "comarca", il
was made essentially temporarily while seeing the duplicate admin_level 7
for Treviño only, when it is only the eastern part of a comarca at level 7
too)

Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 16:33, Diego Cruz Alonso  a
écrit :

> Dear Philippe,
>
> Exactly, the situation is so messed up in Wikipedia and in the map because
> this has never been addressed properly before in Spain. Please stop adding
> things until borders are sorted out in the community. You are not allowed
> to sort this out on your own and we are not accepting undebated
> impositions. If you have a clear plan on how to do things, explain it here
> BEFORE implementing it in the map.
>
> By the way, you *are* inventing things: «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de
> Ebro» is nothing that exists in reality. Please remove that limit.
>
> Best regards
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso

No he dicho que te inventaras "Enclave de Treviño", sino que el que este
ese bien o mal puesto no te da derecho para inventarte otros nombres. El
que te has inventado es «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro»

Como no hay admin_level7 en España cojo me lo invento y que se aguantes los
Españoles. Ole tú. Gran argumento el tuyo. ¿Y si no existe, cómo lo quieres
poner, que en gran parte de España parece que es el caso?¿imponiéndolo?
Esto es lo que se te lleva explicando desde el minuto 1 pero en vez de
dialogar impones que se pone lo que tu dices, como tu dices.

Mira solo quieres imponer tu criterio. Y así no funcionan las cosas, se
acabo ya el intentar razonar contigo y que tu te comportarte como un
prepotente. Así que por favor deja de editar en España y todo solucionado.
Los que somos de aquí lo solucionaremos.

Si no atiendes a razones lo siguiente ya es volver a remitirlo arriba y que
te bloqueen por lo mismo que ya te han bloqueado como pone en este bloqueo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3386
"A pesar de la advertencia en el bloque anterior (“no más ediciones
administrativas en España hasta que la comunidad local esté feliz de que
sus límites sean correctos nuevamente”)"

Claramente te hemos expresado varias personas de varias maneras que no
estamos conformes con sus ediciones y sigues y sigues intentando imponer en
vez de razonar. Deja las ediciones de límites administrativos en España ya.


El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 16:33, Diego Cruz Alonso ()
escribió:

> Dear Philippe,
>
> Exactly, the situation is so messed up in Wikipedia and in the map because
> this has never been addressed properly before in Spain. Please stop adding
> things until borders are sorted out in the community. You are not allowed
> to sort this out on your own and we are not accepting undebated
> impositions. If you have a clear plan on how to do things, explain it here
> BEFORE implementing it in the map.
>
> By the way, you *are* inventing things: «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de
> Ebro» is nothing that exists in reality. Please remove that limit.
>
> Best regards
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>


-- 
Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso - Sanchi
Blog http://jorgesanzs.es/
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread Diego Cruz Alonso

Dear Philippe,

Exactly, the situation is so messed up in Wikipedia and in the map because this 
has never been addressed properly before in Spain. Please stop adding things 
until borders are sorted out in the community. You are not allowed to sort this 
out on your own and we are not accepting undebated impositions. If you have a 
clear plan on how to do things, explain it here BEFORE implementing it in the 
map.

By the way, you are inventing things: «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro» 
is nothing that exists in reality. Please remove that limit.

Best regards___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread yo paseopor

Sorry but let me be clear about this situation:
Please STOP editing boundaries in Spain until Spanish community has
consensus in this topic. Spanish community is very upset with that. More
than 10 people are constantly reviewing your editions. Your editions in
that topic in this moment are not welcomed.
It is clear now Spanish Community of OSM has to do a review of our
boundaries. If we go to
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/boundary#values we can see more than
10 possible types of boundaries we can investigate and edit.
And we miss some custom boundaries we have in some regions as "vegueries"
or "comarcas (agrarias) "agricultural counties" so we have to talk about it
in peace, WITHOUT EDITIONS, make an agreement and apply  and map it.
Then your help will be very welcomed. You are not from Spain,you are not
living in Spain and you don't know Spain better than Spaniards.
I would not go to France to edit the départements.

Thanks for your understanding
yopaseopor
PD: sorry if I sound rude and for my bad English.

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 9:34 PM Philippe Verdy  wrote:

> Hello, I'd like to follow up on the discussion started here about me.
>
> Note: I can read perfectly Spanish, but I won't talk in Spanish as my
> writing level is too poor and could lead to more misinterpretations.
>
> I was told by a Spanish user to map missing comarcas in Aragon and then I
> was blocked for that, even if there was no "error", and there was an
> ongoing talk with existing users that did not contacted me directly on OSM
> but prefer to complain to the DWG.
>
> It is clear from the talks (and it was agreed by the comments sent to the
> changeset) that this was only a misunderstanding. And that I did not break
> anything.
>
> I talked also bout the fact that there are several competing comarcal
> delimitations. They do not exist officially at national level, but are
> effective by laws and regulations in each region (short for autonomous
> community), and that for regions that are separated in different provinces,
> the comarcal decided by regions in their official bulletin of laws does not
> take into consideration the existing province boundaries.
>
> But there were several existing consensus for this topic in related
> projects (including, but not only, Wikidata, Spnish Wikipedia, and
> Commons). And the situation is not clear as all kinds of comarcas are mixed
> together or confused (sometimes with the same name depending on their type).
>
> Anyway there was a "most common" practice existing in relevant commnities
> about what was the more relevant (the situation is complicated by the fact
> that there are "natural comarcas" or "traditional comarcas" which have
> today no official status, of that sometimes coexist at several levels (a
> traditional  "comarca" may be seen as a subcomarca of another traditional
> comarca).
>
> I did not want to promote one kind of comarcas for another, but at least
> make the existing set consistent with itself for the most common use seen
> and discussed since long in various opendata projects). Allowing then the
> separate creation of these comarcas and properly tagging them to
> differentiate them when needed was what I started.
>
> But at least one comarcal division should exist in each region.
>
> I had proposed several things, I was talking about them, but I was blocked
> twice in a row during these talks (and was even blocked from continuing
> these talks or even read the comments).
>
> 
>
> Now I've tried several times to join this list, but the OSM MLM has
> technical problems as it does not comply to the enforcement measures taken
> by various ISP (including very large ones): since about one year (March
> 2019) many ISP have enforced these rules, notably DKIM and DMARC for their
> mails, but the OSM MLM breaks the DKIM and DMARC digital signatures (by
> modifying digitally signed parts of emails: some MIME headers, the mail
> subject line and/or the content body. To do that on messages signed with
> DKIM or DMARC by their original sender, the MLLM must take some care: it
> must sign again its own modifications and update its DNS to conform to DKIM
> and DMARC. But it does not, only the SPF protocol is used, and then the SPF
> protocol breaks again because the OSM MLM is not the original sender. Mails
> sent for the OSM MLM are then bouncing.
>
> And now recently the OSM MLM has been *silently* dropping subscriptions
> from their lists. It has done that massively. Many users can no longer
> communicate on the OSM lists. Worse, now they want to block users because
> their mails are "bouncing". This makes communication in OMS tlak list very
> dangerous if not impossible. People are blocked unfairly even if they did
> not usurpate anyone. They are forced to change their email, can no longer
> choose their provider or loose messages from the lists that they expected
> to see.
>
> I was blocked in OSM because of repeated failure to join this list to
> continue this discussion.

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 14:45, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso 
a écrit :

> Si nos vamos a la documentación de la wiki
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
> Pone que los enclaves se hace en la misma relación y solucionado. No pone
> que se tengan que crear nuevas relaciones, subrelaciones y cosas parecidas.
>
> ¿Qué el "Enclave de Treviño" puede que se tenga que etiquetar de otra
> manera?
>

I did not invent that name, it was already present in OSM !


> Puede ser, ante la duda habra que hablarlo, pero eso no da razón para
> inventarse nombres y cosas nuevas si no existen.
> "Enclave de Treviño" Tiene representación especial dentro de España por
> algunos conflictos que han existido que no comparten otras zonas. Se puede
> ver en qué tiene pagina especial en la wikipedia por ejemplo. Habra que ver
> cómo poner este caso especial.
>

But it's still not a "comarca" under the meaning intended by other comarcas
in the two autonomous communities involved.

>
> Por favor deja de editar fronteras hasta que se llegue a un consenso.
> Estamos abiertos a escuchar sugerencias y ver cómo solucionar los
> diferentes problemas que surgen en las diferentes zonas de España. Pero no
> llegar e imponer criterios.
>

All those existing boundaries at admin_level 7 were added without any prior
consensus of tagging. In fact there's no tagging at all documented for
them. the Wiki OSM just indicates "comarca" is at level 7, but this was an
informal proposal, never discussed, and the link goes to Wikipedia where
they are also not documented and sorted properly (this also applies to
Wikidata where the classification is still not made as well, and commons
where maps and categories are all mixed with ambiguous names). Seriously,
this is not consistant "data" in the OSM meaning.

There's a need to start creating something consistant (this does not mean
removing what was made, just retagging properly and avoid conflicts of
interpretation). And there, nothing is documented. We must still start by
the "hard way" trying to disambiguate things to get at least one consistant
view and then retag the rest with temporary tags that can be rediscussed to
get more views.

OSM is all about that: someone starts the hard job to separate the
concepts, fill holes, find overlaps; this requires much efforts to prepare
the field (what I'm doing, while avoiding to create too much conflicts).
Then there's a cleanup and maintenance step that occurs until the existing
schema is found to be insufficient.

Because of these inconsistancies the admin_level 7 was found to be unusable
and unused in OSM for Spain. So much opendata about these comarcas still
cannot be imported and checked. Being coherent is a great thing as it
really helps integrating more items and developing new methods to be more
precise and solve ambiguities, and develop new usages of OSM data for
derived cartography (notably statistical maps, related to many other open
data or private data, with enough granularity that people can understand;
but with just communities, provinces and municipalities, this is
insufficient: there are hundreds of municipalities in provinces or
autonomous communities and no way to use significant grouping that matches
verifiable sources; so each one has to recreate its own comarcal
delimitation, frequently with errors/omissions/overlaps or different
meanings, and the statistics map and aggregated data are not comparable
with each other).


> No se a que llamas mapa en mayusculas "MAPA"
>

MAPA was refereing to the *correct* and common Spanish abbreviation for the
full name of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food
("Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación") and I thought it was
implicit and wellknown to native Spanish users (like you?)

It's not the Spanish equivalent of "map" in English. The capitals were
correct in that case and really intended (and it would be a non-sense to
cite an unspecified anbd generic "mapa" as a source. The *lowercase* would
have been obviously wrong in the context I gave. And the sources in OSM
indicate the full Spanish name of the ministry, not this abbreviation I
used only in this talk thread.
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread Jose Luis Infante

Hola Phillippe,

por favor, para de editar límites administrativos en España. Varios
usuarios de la comunidad te lo han pedido y has seguido editando. Muchos
usuarios de la comunidad están muy descontentos con tu actitud de hechos
consumados.

Para de editar.

Después podemos hablar de qué límites administrativos son correctos y
cuáles no, uno por uno.

Un saludo,

Jose Luis



El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 14:44, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso (<
sanc...@gmail.com>) escribió:

> Si nos vamos a la documentación de la wiki
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
> Pone que los enclaves se hace en la misma relación y solucionado. No pone
> que se tengan que crear nuevas relaciones, subrelaciones y cosas parecidas.
>
> ¿Qué el "Enclave de Treviño" puede que se tenga que etiquetar de otra
> manera? Puede ser, ante la duda habra que hablarlo, pero eso no da razón
> para inventarse nombres y cosas nuevas si no existen.
> "Enclave de Treviño" Tiene representación especial dentro de España por
> algunos conflictos que han existido que no comparten otras zonas. Se puede
> ver en qué tiene pagina especial en la wikipedia por ejemplo. Habra que ver
> cómo poner este caso especial.
>
> Por favor deja de editar fronteras hasta que se llegue a un consenso.
> Estamos abiertos a escuchar sugerencias y ver cómo solucionar los
> diferentes problemas que surgen en las diferentes zonas de España. Pero no
> llegar e imponer criterios.
>
> No se a que llamas mapa en mayusculas "MAPA"
>
> El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 13:26, Philippe Verdy ()
> escribió:
>
>> The enclaves de Miranda de Ebro are related to another one, for Treviño
>> in the same area that was also mapped and overlapped the same level 7 as
>> the comarca de Ebro (containing that enclave).
>> But these enclaves de Mirando de Ebro are enclaved by another province
>> than those for Treviño. I did not make them "comarcas", it may have just
>> been while looking for holes or overlaps.
>>
>> I've seen a few comarcas that forgot enclaves of their municipalities or
>> included enclaves of other municipalities not member of the comarca.
>>
>> The object named "Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro" is more or less
>> descriptive, just like the name given to "Enclave de Treviño", they are
>> documented with similar but varying names in historical documents as such
>> "enclaves", but not administrative today by themselves as they have no form
>> of autonomy. This was not made as a "comarca" at all. If you don't like it,
>> no problem for removing it (but then what is "Enclave de Treviño" ?
>>
>
>> There's a mix and confusion between what are "comarcas" in Spain. It's a
>> generic term just like "geographic region" used for various things
>> grouping, not necessarily endorsed by an existing public collectivity
>> (municipalities, provinces, autonomous communities, and the state).
>>
>> And someone says that I did not reply to questions sent on this list.
>> I've seen comments, but the real questions were actually written by me. I
>> proposed to sort these. And create a correct tagging that avoids the
>> confusions between the comarcal types. I did not say we should remove these
>> and visibly existing users have different needs.
>>
>
>> The agrarian comarcas are documented by MAPA, even published on their
>> opendata and visible on their online map, throughout Spain. They have some
>> administrative status for managing agriculture founding and the Spanish and
>> European planification. They have documented names, and do not necessarily
>> follow the regional and/or provincial delimitations or the historical and
>> "natural"/traditional delimitations
>>
>> The delimitations of historical and "natural" comarcas have also borders
>> that are in fact very fuzzy if defined with borders of today's
>> municipalities, when they were groups of villages whose delimitations have
>> changed locally before they were organized as municipalities, and sometimes
>> merged into the same town or city. It's just like trying to map mountain
>> chains: this cannot be based on today's administrative borders (e.g. the
>> Pyrenees or the Andes cordillera).
>>
>> In OSM there are some fuzzy objects types like bays, that use quite
>> precise coastlines but fuzzy strokes across the see and no clear point of
>> intersection between these strokes and the coastlines. They are "natural"
>> objects for geographic regions, bot "boundaries". May be this should apply
>> to natural comarcas whose /exact/ borders are in fact not so exact and vary
>> across authors (and they just agree about which historical urbanized
>> settlements should be inside, but not really for how for of the surrounding
>> rural area they should enclose. There may be some natural artefacts like
>> rivers or cliffs, but rivers also have changed over history, cliffs are not
>> easy to delineate and were also changed by human activity, like also
>> forests and lakes/ponds also have largely changed or very across seasons.
>>
>> Natural

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso

Si nos vamos a la documentación de la wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
Pone que los enclaves se hace en la misma relación y solucionado. No pone
que se tengan que crear nuevas relaciones, subrelaciones y cosas parecidas.

¿Qué el "Enclave de Treviño" puede que se tenga que etiquetar de otra
manera? Puede ser, ante la duda habra que hablarlo, pero eso no da razón
para inventarse nombres y cosas nuevas si no existen.
"Enclave de Treviño" Tiene representación especial dentro de España por
algunos conflictos que han existido que no comparten otras zonas. Se puede
ver en qué tiene pagina especial en la wikipedia por ejemplo. Habra que ver
cómo poner este caso especial.

Por favor deja de editar fronteras hasta que se llegue a un consenso.
Estamos abiertos a escuchar sugerencias y ver cómo solucionar los
diferentes problemas que surgen en las diferentes zonas de España. Pero no
llegar e imponer criterios.

No se a que llamas mapa en mayusculas "MAPA"

El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 13:26, Philippe Verdy ()
escribió:

> The enclaves de Miranda de Ebro are related to another one, for Treviño in
> the same area that was also mapped and overlapped the same level 7 as the
> comarca de Ebro (containing that enclave).
> But these enclaves de Mirando de Ebro are enclaved by another province
> than those for Treviño. I did not make them "comarcas", it may have just
> been while looking for holes or overlaps.
>
> I've seen a few comarcas that forgot enclaves of their municipalities or
> included enclaves of other municipalities not member of the comarca.
>
> The object named "Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro" is more or less
> descriptive, just like the name given to "Enclave de Treviño", they are
> documented with similar but varying names in historical documents as such
> "enclaves", but not administrative today by themselves as they have no form
> of autonomy. This was not made as a "comarca" at all. If you don't like it,
> no problem for removing it (but then what is "Enclave de Treviño" ?
>

> There's a mix and confusion between what are "comarcas" in Spain. It's a
> generic term just like "geographic region" used for various things
> grouping, not necessarily endorsed by an existing public collectivity
> (municipalities, provinces, autonomous communities, and the state).
>
> And someone says that I did not reply to questions sent on this list. I've
> seen comments, but the real questions were actually written by me. I
> proposed to sort these. And create a correct tagging that avoids the
> confusions between the comarcal types. I did not say we should remove these
> and visibly existing users have different needs.
>

> The agrarian comarcas are documented by MAPA, even published on their
> opendata and visible on their online map, throughout Spain. They have some
> administrative status for managing agriculture founding and the Spanish and
> European planification. They have documented names, and do not necessarily
> follow the regional and/or provincial delimitations or the historical and
> "natural"/traditional delimitations
>
> The delimitations of historical and "natural" comarcas have also borders
> that are in fact very fuzzy if defined with borders of today's
> municipalities, when they were groups of villages whose delimitations have
> changed locally before they were organized as municipalities, and sometimes
> merged into the same town or city. It's just like trying to map mountain
> chains: this cannot be based on today's administrative borders (e.g. the
> Pyrenees or the Andes cordillera).
>
> In OSM there are some fuzzy objects types like bays, that use quite
> precise coastlines but fuzzy strokes across the see and no clear point of
> intersection between these strokes and the coastlines. They are "natural"
> objects for geographic regions, bot "boundaries". May be this should apply
> to natural comarcas whose /exact/ borders are in fact not so exact and vary
> across authors (and they just agree about which historical urbanized
> settlements should be inside, but not really for how for of the surrounding
> rural area they should enclose. There may be some natural artefacts like
> rivers or cliffs, but rivers also have changed over history, cliffs are not
> easy to delineate and were also changed by human activity, like also
> forests and lakes/ponds also have largely changed or very across seasons.
>
> Natural objects still can live in OSM but not withe the same tags and
> should not be based on lines drawn for precise objects. And they can
> perfectly overlap, but have low precision. Historical objects also have
> generally not been accepted in OSM unless they stil lexist in some
> legislation or treaty or for some limited purposes (such as statistical
> continuity for about 10 years, or preservation of existing contracts, and
> for the legal delay of judiciary procedures or adaptation of the rest of
> the legislation, needed after a recent legal change: these

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread David Marín Carreño

Hola, Philippe.

Por consiguiente, estas comarcas que estás mapeando no son del tipo
administrativo, ya que no se emplean para la zonificación administrativa
oficial del territorio que en España está dividida en comunidades
autónomas, provincias y municipios (y comarcas sólo en aquellos lugares
donde la legislación autonómica así lo ha definido).
Tampoco son "boundary=political", ya que no son demarcaciones electorales.

Estos límites comarcales "temáticos" deberán ser mapeados empleando una
etiqueta boundary nueva, según lo que se decida en el hilo "Unidades
Administrativas - Castilla y León [debate]" que ha abierto Crashillo.

Un cordial saludo,
--
David Marín Carreño 



El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 14:10, Philippe Verdy ()
escribió:

> Note also that "political" boundaries are used in Spain for linguistic
> areas, not just electoral constituencies.
>
> There should be a subtag for the political=* type to distinguish them (and
> there are multiple consituency types depending on the kind of elections,
> including European elections for European deputies elected for Spain).
>
> I just challenge here the fact that every concept is mixed, and there are
> already collisions on the same classification tags for different things.
> This does not allow easy searches and clear results (e.g. to create
> statistical maps without doubly-counted overlaps).
>
> So first we must solve these collisions, find holes that should be filled
> for completeness (needed for statistics), and then apply consistent tagging
> (which can be decided, for now it's not even documented anywhere, there are
> just different assumptions by different users: it's a mess to find the
> existing items in OSM and get consistant results).
>
> Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 13:47, Francisco Javier Diez Rabanos <
> diera...@jcyl.es> a écrit :
>
>> De la mismas manera que las comarcas agrícolas se pueden incluir las
>> comarcas forestales, que en Castilla y León están disponibles en el portal
>> de datos abiertos.
>>
>>
>> https://datosabiertos.jcyl.es/web/jcyl/set/es/medio-ambiente/comarcas-medio-ambiente-cyl/1284687310081
>>
>>
>>
>> *De:* Philippe Verdy [mailto:ver...@gmail.com]
>> *Enviado el:* miércoles, 22 de enero de 2020 13:25
>> *Para:* Discusión en Español de OpenStreetMap 
>> *Asunto:* Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list
>>
>>
>>
>> The enclaves de Miranda de Ebro are related to another one, for Treviño
>> in the same area that was also mapped and overlapped the same level 7 as
>> the comarca de Ebro (containing that enclave).
>>
>> But these enclaves de Mirando de Ebro are enclaved by another province
>> than those for Treviño. I did not make them "comarcas", it may have just
>> been while looking for holes or overlaps.
>>
>>
>>
>> I've seen a few comarcas that forgot enclaves of their municipalities or
>> included enclaves of other municipalities not member of the comarca.
>>
>>
>>
>> The object named "Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro" is more or less
>> descriptive, just like the name given to "Enclave de Treviño", they are
>> documented with similar but varying names in historical documents as such
>> "enclaves", but not administrative today by themselves as they have no form
>> of autonomy. This was not made as a "comarca" at all. If you don't like it,
>> no problem for removing it (but then what is "Enclave de Treviño" ?
>>
>>
>>
>> There's a mix and confusion between what are "comarcas" in Spain. It's a
>> generic term just like "geographic region" used for various things
>> grouping, not necessarily endorsed by an existing public collectivity
>> (municipalities, provinces, autonomous communities, and the state).
>>
>>
>>
>> And someone says that I did not reply to questions sent on this list.
>> I've seen comments, but the real questions were actually written by me. I
>> proposed to sort these. And create a correct tagging that avoids the
>> confusions between the comarcal types. I did not say we should remove these
>> and visibly existing users have different needs.
>>
>>
>>
>> The agrarian comarcas are documented by MAPA, even published on their
>> opendata and visible on their online map, throughout Spain. They have some
>> administrative status for managing agriculture founding and the Spanish and
>> European planification. They have documented names, and do not necessarily
>> follow the regional and/or provincial delimitations or the historical and
>> "natura

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

Note also that "political" boundaries are used in Spain for linguistic
areas, not just electoral constituencies.

There should be a subtag for the political=* type to distinguish them (and
there are multiple consituency types depending on the kind of elections,
including European elections for European deputies elected for Spain).

I just challenge here the fact that every concept is mixed, and there are
already collisions on the same classification tags for different things.
This does not allow easy searches and clear results (e.g. to create
statistical maps without doubly-counted overlaps).

So first we must solve these collisions, find holes that should be filled
for completeness (needed for statistics), and then apply consistent tagging
(which can be decided, for now it's not even documented anywhere, there are
just different assumptions by different users: it's a mess to find the
existing items in OSM and get consistant results).

Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 13:47, Francisco Javier Diez Rabanos <
diera...@jcyl.es> a écrit :

> De la mismas manera que las comarcas agrícolas se pueden incluir las
> comarcas forestales, que en Castilla y León están disponibles en el portal
> de datos abiertos.
>
>
> https://datosabiertos.jcyl.es/web/jcyl/set/es/medio-ambiente/comarcas-medio-ambiente-cyl/1284687310081
>
>
>
> *De:* Philippe Verdy [mailto:ver...@gmail.com]
> *Enviado el:* miércoles, 22 de enero de 2020 13:25
> *Para:* Discusión en Español de OpenStreetMap 
> *Asunto:* Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list
>
>
>
> The enclaves de Miranda de Ebro are related to another one, for Treviño in
> the same area that was also mapped and overlapped the same level 7 as the
> comarca de Ebro (containing that enclave).
>
> But these enclaves de Mirando de Ebro are enclaved by another province
> than those for Treviño. I did not make them "comarcas", it may have just
> been while looking for holes or overlaps.
>
>
>
> I've seen a few comarcas that forgot enclaves of their municipalities or
> included enclaves of other municipalities not member of the comarca.
>
>
>
> The object named "Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro" is more or less
> descriptive, just like the name given to "Enclave de Treviño", they are
> documented with similar but varying names in historical documents as such
> "enclaves", but not administrative today by themselves as they have no form
> of autonomy. This was not made as a "comarca" at all. If you don't like it,
> no problem for removing it (but then what is "Enclave de Treviño" ?
>
>
>
> There's a mix and confusion between what are "comarcas" in Spain. It's a
> generic term just like "geographic region" used for various things
> grouping, not necessarily endorsed by an existing public collectivity
> (municipalities, provinces, autonomous communities, and the state).
>
>
>
> And someone says that I did not reply to questions sent on this list. I've
> seen comments, but the real questions were actually written by me. I
> proposed to sort these. And create a correct tagging that avoids the
> confusions between the comarcal types. I did not say we should remove these
> and visibly existing users have different needs.
>
>
>
> The agrarian comarcas are documented by MAPA, even published on their
> opendata and visible on their online map, throughout Spain. They have some
> administrative status for managing agriculture founding and the Spanish and
> European planification. They have documented names, and do not necessarily
> follow the regional and/or provincial delimitations or the historical and
> "natural"/traditional delimitations
>
>
>
> The delimitations of historical and "natural" comarcas have also borders
> that are in fact very fuzzy if defined with borders of today's
> municipalities, when they were groups of villages whose delimitations have
> changed locally before they were organized as municipalities, and sometimes
> merged into the same town or city. It's just like trying to map mountain
> chains: this cannot be based on today's administrative borders (e.g. the
> Pyrenees or the Andes cordillera).
>
>
>
> In OSM there are some fuzzy objects types like bays, that use quite
> precise coastlines but fuzzy strokes across the see and no clear point of
> intersection between these strokes and the coastlines. They are "natural"
> objects for geographic regions, bot "boundaries". May be this should apply
> to natural comarcas whose /exact/ borders are in fact not so exact and vary
> across authors (and they just agree about which historical urbanized
> settlements should be inside, but not real

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread Francisco Javier Diez Rabanos

De la mismas manera que las comarcas agrícolas se pueden incluir las comarcas
forestales, que en Castilla y León están disponibles en el portal de datos
abiertos.
https://datosabiertos.jcyl.es/web/jcyl/set/es/medio-ambiente/comarcas-medio-ambiente-cyl/1284687310081

De: Philippe Verdy [mailto:ver...@gmail.com]
Enviado el: miércoles, 22 de enero de 2020 13:25
Para: Discusión en Español de OpenStreetMap
Asunto: Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

The enclaves de Miranda de Ebro are related to another one, for Treviño in the
same area that was also mapped and overlapped the same level 7 as the comarca
de Ebro (containing that enclave).
But these enclaves de Mirando de Ebro are enclaved by another province than
those for Treviño. I did not make them "comarcas", it may have just been while
looking for holes or overlaps.

I've seen a few comarcas that forgot enclaves of their municipalities or
included enclaves of other municipalities not member of the comarca.

The object named "Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro" is more or less
descriptive, just like the name given to "Enclave de Treviño", they are
documented with similar but varying names in historical documents as such
"enclaves", but not administrative today by themselves as they have no form of
autonomy. This was not made as a "comarca" at all. If you don't like it, no
problem for removing it (but then what is "Enclave de Treviño" ?

There's a mix and confusion between what are "comarcas" in Spain. It's a
generic term just like "geographic region" used for various things grouping,
not necessarily endorsed by an existing public collectivity (municipalities,
provinces, autonomous communities, and the state).

And someone says that I did not reply to questions sent on this list. I've seen
comments, but the real questions were actually written by me. I proposed to
sort these. And create a correct tagging that avoids the confusions between the
comarcal types. I did not say we should remove these and visibly existing users
have different needs.

The agrarian comarcas are documented by MAPA, even published on their opendata
and visible on their online map, throughout Spain. They have some
administrative status for managing agriculture founding and the Spanish and
European planification. They have documented names, and do not necessarily
follow the regional and/or provincial delimitations or the historical and
"natural"/traditional delimitations

The delimitations of historical and "natural" comarcas have also borders that
are in fact very fuzzy if defined with borders of today's municipalities, when
they were groups of villages whose delimitations have changed locally before
they were organized as municipalities, and sometimes merged into the same town
or city. It's just like trying to map mountain chains: this cannot be based on
today's administrative borders (e.g. the Pyrenees or the Andes cordillera).

In OSM there are some fuzzy objects types like bays, that use quite precise
coastlines but fuzzy strokes across the see and no clear point of intersection
between these strokes and the coastlines. They are "natural" objects for
geographic regions, bot "boundaries". May be this should apply to natural
comarcas whose /exact/ borders are in fact not so exact and vary across authors
(and they just agree about which historical urbanized settlements should be
inside, but not really for how for of the surrounding rural area they should
enclose. There may be some natural artefacts like rivers or cliffs, but rivers
also have changed over history, cliffs are not easy to delineate and were also
changed by human activity, like also forests and lakes/ponds also have largely
changed or very across seasons.

Natural objects still can live in OSM but not withe the same tags and should
not be based on lines drawn for precise objects. And they can perfectly
overlap, but have low precision. Historical objects also have generally not
been accepted in OSM unless they stil lexist in some legislation or treaty or
for some limited purposes (such as statistical continuity for about 10 years,
or preservation of existing contracts, and for the legal delay of judiciary
procedures or adaptation of the rest of the legislation, needed after a recent
legal change: these preservation is very useful for having precise statistical
reports and maps).

Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 09:56, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso
mailto:sanc...@gmail.com>> a écrit :
Buenas.

Le agradecería a Philippe Verdy que en vez de seguir editando hablara y dijera
qué sucede. Estoy esperando a que conteste sobre las zonas que no hay ley y en
las que se esta volviendo a meter a editar según parece. Dialogar con la
comunidad no es soltar qué ha escrito aquí, decir que todo lo ha hecho bien y
cuando se le dice que no, irse a seguir h

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

The enclaves de Miranda de Ebro are related to another one, for Treviño in
the same area that was also mapped and overlapped the same level 7 as the
comarca de Ebro (containing that enclave).
But these enclaves de Mirando de Ebro are enclaved by another province than
those for Treviño. I did not make them "comarcas", it may have just been
while looking for holes or overlaps.

I've seen a few comarcas that forgot enclaves of their municipalities or
included enclaves of other municipalities not member of the comarca.

The object named "Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro" is more or less
descriptive, just like the name given to "Enclave de Treviño", they are
documented with similar but varying names in historical documents as such
"enclaves", but not administrative today by themselves as they have no form
of autonomy. This was not made as a "comarca" at all. If you don't like it,
no problem for removing it (but then what is "Enclave de Treviño" ?

There's a mix and confusion between what are "comarcas" in Spain. It's a
generic term just like "geographic region" used for various things
grouping, not necessarily endorsed by an existing public collectivity
(municipalities, provinces, autonomous communities, and the state).

And someone says that I did not reply to questions sent on this list. I've
seen comments, but the real questions were actually written by me. I
proposed to sort these. And create a correct tagging that avoids the
confusions between the comarcal types. I did not say we should remove these
and visibly existing users have different needs.

The agrarian comarcas are documented by MAPA, even published on their
opendata and visible on their online map, throughout Spain. They have some
administrative status for managing agriculture founding and the Spanish and
European planification. They have documented names, and do not necessarily
follow the regional and/or provincial delimitations or the historical and
"natural"/traditional delimitations

The delimitations of historical and "natural" comarcas have also borders
that are in fact very fuzzy if defined with borders of today's
municipalities, when they were groups of villages whose delimitations have
changed locally before they were organized as municipalities, and sometimes
merged into the same town or city. It's just like trying to map mountain
chains: this cannot be based on today's administrative borders (e.g. the
Pyrenees or the Andes cordillera).

In OSM there are some fuzzy objects types like bays, that use quite precise
coastlines but fuzzy strokes across the see and no clear point of
intersection between these strokes and the coastlines. They are "natural"
objects for geographic regions, bot "boundaries". May be this should apply
to natural comarcas whose /exact/ borders are in fact not so exact and vary
across authors (and they just agree about which historical urbanized
settlements should be inside, but not really for how for of the surrounding
rural area they should enclose. There may be some natural artefacts like
rivers or cliffs, but rivers also have changed over history, cliffs are not
easy to delineate and were also changed by human activity, like also
forests and lakes/ponds also have largely changed or very across seasons.

Natural objects still can live in OSM but not withe the same tags and
should not be based on lines drawn for precise objects. And they can
perfectly overlap, but have low precision. Historical objects also have
generally not been accepted in OSM unless they stil lexist in some
legislation or treaty or for some limited purposes (such as statistical
continuity for about 10 years, or preservation of existing contracts, and
for the legal delay of judiciary procedures or adaptation of the rest of
the legislation, needed after a recent legal change: these preservation is
very useful for having precise statistical reports and maps).


Le mer. 22 janv. 2020 à 09:56, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso 
a écrit :

> Buenas.
>
> Le agradecería a Philippe Verdy que en vez de seguir editando hablara y
> dijera qué sucede. Estoy esperando a que conteste sobre las zonas que no
> hay ley y en las que se esta volviendo a meter a editar según parece.
> Dialogar con la comunidad no es soltar qué ha escrito aquí, decir que todo
> lo ha hecho bien y cuando se le dice que no, irse a seguir haciendo lo
> mismo. Hay que hablar y dialogar y ver los puntos de vista.
>
> No creo que se le este pidiendo nada especial. Es una cosa esencial en una
> sociedad civilizada, hablar las cosas. Si no quieres hablar y solucionarlo
> solo nos queda volver a pedir que actúen desde arriba.
>
> Yo creo que si no hay ley que las regule, que legalmente no existen pero
> sí con otros motivos históricos, agrarios, Deberíamos decidir por cuál
> de esos motivos es el más adecuado etiquetarlos y poner un etiquetado
> diferente. No podemos tener igual las fronteras oficiales que unas
> fronteras históricas que no existen realmente. Eso sí en todos los casos
>

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-22 Thread Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso

Buenas.

Le agradecería a Philippe Verdy que en vez de seguir editando hablara y
dijera qué sucede. Estoy esperando a que conteste sobre las zonas que no
hay ley y en las que se esta volviendo a meter a editar según parece.
Dialogar con la comunidad no es soltar qué ha escrito aquí, decir que todo
lo ha hecho bien y cuando se le dice que no, irse a seguir haciendo lo
mismo. Hay que hablar y dialogar y ver los puntos de vista.

No creo que se le este pidiendo nada especial. Es una cosa esencial en una
sociedad civilizada, hablar las cosas. Si no quieres hablar y solucionarlo
solo nos queda volver a pedir que actúen desde arriba.

Yo creo que si no hay ley que las regule, que legalmente no existen pero sí
con otros motivos históricos, agrarios, Deberíamos decidir por cuál de
esos motivos es el más adecuado etiquetarlos y poner un etiquetado
diferente. No podemos tener igual las fronteras oficiales que unas
fronteras históricas que no existen realmente. Eso sí en todos los casos
fronteras documentadas correctamente.

Agradecería la opinión del resto, pero sobre todo de Philippe Verdy antes
de que continue sus ediciones.

Y mirando lo de «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro». ¿Verdy nos lo
puedes explicar?

Saludos.

El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 8:47, Diego García ()
escribió:

> Buenos días.
>
> Por Aragón también.
>
> No voy a andar revisando todo cada vez que interviene este editor.
> Como ejemplo https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79841251 donde crea
> comarcas en Teruel y de paso le cambia el adminlevel a la localidad de
> Monzón de 7 a 8, siendo que es la capital del Cinca Medio. Veo muchas más
> ediciones, pero no me las voy a repasar todas.
>
> Qué pereza, madre mía. Y qué paciencia.
>
>
>
> Un saludo,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 5:15, Diego Cruz Alonso ()
> escribió:
>
>> Buenos días a todos:
>>
>> Lamento tener que volver a escribir a la lista en relación con este tema,
>> pero el usuario Verdy_p ha vuelto a editar demarcaciones en Castilla y
>> León. Ha creado dos áreas con boundary=political en la provincia de Burgos,
>> una en el condado de Treviño y otra agrupando otros dos enclaves que ha
>> denominado «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro» (me aventuro a decir que
>> tal cosa no existe). Por lo que veo la etiqueta boundary=political se
>> utiliza en España para circunscripciones electorales y cosas así, ¿me
>> equivoco? ¿Tiene sentido crear entes específicos para los enclaves con ella?
>>
>> Además, ha seguido creando comarcas agrarias (ahora en Palencia) sin
>> esperar a que se decida en común lo que se quiere hacer con las comarcas en
>> esta comunidad autónoma (invito a otros usuarios castellanoleoneses a
>> participar y a todo el que quiera opinar). Cabe la posibilidad de que haya
>> que borrar todas, pues la única oficial sigue siendo El Bierzo, así que es
>> posible que esté perdiendo su tiempo y nos lo haga perder posteriormente si
>> tenemos que borrar todo.
>>
>> Un saludo
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-es mailing list
>> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>


-- 
Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso - Sanchi
Blog http://jorgesanzs.es/
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-21 Thread Diego García

Buenos días.

Por Aragón también.

No voy a andar revisando todo cada vez que interviene este editor.
Como ejemplo https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79841251 donde crea
comarcas en Teruel y de paso le cambia el adminlevel a la localidad de
Monzón de 7 a 8, siendo que es la capital del Cinca Medio. Veo muchas más
ediciones, pero no me las voy a repasar todas.

Qué pereza, madre mía. Y qué paciencia.



Un saludo,






El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 5:15, Diego Cruz Alonso ()
escribió:

> Buenos días a todos:
>
> Lamento tener que volver a escribir a la lista en relación con este tema,
> pero el usuario Verdy_p ha vuelto a editar demarcaciones en Castilla y
> León. Ha creado dos áreas con boundary=political en la provincia de Burgos,
> una en el condado de Treviño y otra agrupando otros dos enclaves que ha
> denominado «Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro» (me aventuro a decir que
> tal cosa no existe). Por lo que veo la etiqueta boundary=political se
> utiliza en España para circunscripciones electorales y cosas así, ¿me
> equivoco? ¿Tiene sentido crear entes específicos para los enclaves con ella?
>
> Además, ha seguido creando comarcas agrarias (ahora en Palencia) sin
> esperar a que se decida en común lo que se quiere hacer con las comarcas en
> esta comunidad autónoma (invito a otros usuarios castellanoleoneses a
> participar y a todo el que quiera opinar). Cabe la posibilidad de que haya
> que borrar todas, pues la única oficial sigue siendo El Bierzo, así que es
> posible que esté perdiendo su tiempo y nos lo haga perder posteriormente si
> tenemos que borrar todo.
>
> Un saludo
>
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-21 Thread Diego Cruz Alonso

Buenos días a todos:

Lamento tener que volver a escribir a la lista en relación con este tema, pero 
el usuario Verdy_p ha vuelto a editar demarcaciones en Castilla y León. Ha 
creado dos áreas con boundary=political en la provincia de Burgos, una en el 
condado de Treviño y otra agrupando otros dos enclaves que ha denominado 
«Enclaves burgueses de Miranda de Ebro» (me aventuro a decir que tal cosa no 
existe). Por lo que veo la etiqueta boundary=political se utiliza en España 
para circunscripciones electorales y cosas así, ¿me equivoco? ¿Tiene sentido 
crear entes específicos para los enclaves con ella?

Además, ha seguido creando comarcas agrarias (ahora en Palencia) sin esperar a 
que se decida en común lo que se quiere hacer con las comarcas en esta 
comunidad autónoma (invito a otros usuarios castellanoleoneses a participar y a 
todo el que quiera opinar). Cabe la posibilidad de que haya que borrar todas, 
pues la única oficial sigue siendo El Bierzo, así que es posible que esté 
perdiendo su tiempo y nos lo haga perder posteriormente si tenemos que borrar 
todo.

Un saludo


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

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-19 Thread Diego García

 Buenas tardes, Philippe.

Para que no estemos dando vueltas en círculo, voy a dejarlo claro: ahora
veo que los límites administrativos son una combinación de adminlevel y
boundary. Visto así, efectivamente, estoy equivocado y no se han duplicado
las comarcas. Sin embargo, lo que ha hecho usted es inventarse un límite
nuevo, no sé qué es peor.

"I agree with that and I have not challanged that. It was additional
independant objects (for reference purpose only and useful for contruction
purpose and verification)."

Por favor, deme un solo ejemplo de proceso de referencia, construcción o
verificación en que sea necesario el etiquetado que usted está tratando de
imponernos, fraccionando las comarcas en objetos independientes. Etiquetado
que, por otro lado, no está documentado en ninguna parte, es una mera
invención suya. Dígame en cuál de esas leyes que ha estudiado aparece "Hoya
de Huesca (Zaragoza)". No es algo que exista ni sobre el terreno, ni como
construcción artificial de datos que se necesite.

"But if you can't understand that (at least when a complete and coherent
set of relations is built, we need additional intermediate objects (like
these few "fraction" subnelations, whose name is not important and will be
invisible, except in OSM editors) and sort and organize the long lists of
municipalities to avoid forgetting one..."

Lo entiendo perfectamente, y vuelvo a decir que los objetos fraccionarios
que usted propone son innecesarios, solo contribuyen a que todo sea más
complicado. Más arriba menciona que siguió las convenciones antes de
editar: mire, no se lo niego. Tenemos la documentación muy poco
desarrollada, comparada con otros países. Pero tengo claro que no siguió
dichas convenciones después: ¿porqué no paró cuando vió que varios editores
españoles le expresaron su disgusto con lo que usted estaba haciendo?

Conozco de sobra la situación de los límites en Aragón. Salvo las comarcas
de Huesca y algunas de Zaragoza y Teruel, el resto de comarcas no están
incluídas, y los municipios no están bien, fruto de ediciones precipitadas
al principio, y de poco cuidado después. Se habrá encontrado de todo:
fronteras rotas, etc. Y si me hubiera preguntado antes, se lo habría
contado encantado. No se imagina cómo le hubiera agradecido que viniera a
echarnos una mano limpiando municipios o completando comarcas, de verdad.
Pero ya le digo que así, no.

Escuche: le estuvimos diciendo clara y unánimemente desde la comunidad
española que no fraccione las comarcas, y usted insistió en ello y en
justificar sus acciones, sin aportar ningún argumento que convenza. Le
estuvimos diciendo también que no edite límites sin debate previo y sin
enfrentar ideas con la comunidad local de esa autonomía, y estuvo haciendo
oídos sordos y dando excusas. A pesar de todo ello no ha parado de editar
hasta que le han baneado dos veces, que es cuando realmente se ha puesto en
contacto con nosotros. Y con todo ello, todavía no le hemos visto ni una
sola vez pedir disculpas o admitir que se ha equivocado, aunque solo sea
por cortesía.



En fin, un saludo,
Diego
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-19 Thread Diego García

Estimado Philippe.

Mi caso es casi el opuesto al suyo. No hablo ni escribo en inglés, pero por
motivos laborales no me queda otro remedio que entenderlo, aunque un poco
deficientemente. Si para evitar errores en la traducción debemos utilizar
ambos idiomas, tendrá que ser así.

Lo primero que me gustaría explicarle es que su actitud no se corresponde
con un editor que lleva varios años de actividad sobresaliente tanto en
cantidad como en calidad en sus ediciones. Para que me entienda, yo jamás
me pondría a editar los límites administrativos de otro país sin ponerme
antes en contacto con el grupo de editores activo en la zona. Eso es algo
que no me entra en la cabeza, por muy colaborativo que sea el proyecto. Se
trata de un tema de educación y cortesía, además de los destrozos que se
pueden hacer si no conozco suficientemente el tema. No vale decir que
intentó ponerse en contacto con nosotros: el tema que usted editaba (los
límites comarcales) no estaba tan mal ni era tan urgente editarlo como para
emprender la tarea sin decirnos algo antes.

Sobre el tema concreto de las comarcas, trataré de ser breve. Ya hace un
tiempo que la comunidad española tratamos el tema y básicamente decidimos
que cada autonomía hiciese lo que se corresponde a la realidad allí.
Resulta que aunque haya establecida por ley una división comarcal para cada
autonomía, en la práctica no se ha aplicado por igual. Del mismo modo que
en Aragón tenemos comarcas funcionales y que se corresponden (más o menos)
con la realidad histórica y geográfica, en Castilla-León no quieren ni oir
hablar del tema. Recuerdo a otro editor diciendo, por supuesto en tono
coloquial, de cortarle alguna parte del cuerpo al que se le ocurriera crear
comarcas en su autonomía. Y estamos todos de acuerdo con ello: ¿quién va a
conocer mejor una zona que aquellos que la habitan? ¿quién debe tener la
última palabra sobre cómo editar en su zona, sobre cómo está organizada,
siempre que se atenga a las normas? Lástima que este debate se produjo en
el canal de telegram: aquí doy la razón a mi compañero Miguel, si no le
estaría pasando el enlace de la lista.

"I was told by a Spanish user to map missing comarcas in Aragon and then I
was blocked for that, even if there was no "error", and there was an
ongoing talk with existing users that did not contacted me directly on OSM
but prefer to complain to the DWG."

Me va a permitir que dude que esto sea así. Si no le importa, mencione qué
usuario le invitó a mapear las comarcas de Aragón. Y no diga que este fue
el motivo de su bloqueo: su edición errónea (porque sí lo es), fue
revertida con buenas razones, que se le indicaron en el propio conjunto de
cambios. A partir de ahí usted empezó una discusión en esa misma edición
sin querer escuchar otros argumentos, y no sólo no paró de editar, sino que
además revertió de nuevo los cambios, lo que es claramente una guerra de
ediciones. Fue entonces cuando le bloquearon, no antes. Hasta este segundo
bloqueo no se ha puesto usted en contacto con nosotros... ¿Dónde está el
malentendido? No veo buena fe en su actuación.

"About the case of Avila, there are were two different kinds of comarcas in
the same province and they would have overlapped. (...)"

Sobre el caso de Ávila, usted no propuso nada. Llegó y editó, punto. Se le
llamó la atención y no hizo caso, se limitó a aplicar su criterio.

"Spain is not more complicate than France or other countries."

No, no es más complicado. De hecho, puede que sea más sencillo. Lo que sí
son es diferentes. No me diga que ha estudiado mucho para editar aquí, lo
que tenía que haber hecho es hablar con nosotros después de estudiar para
aclarar las cosas.

Respecto a su edición en Aragón, partamos de lo que es cierto e
indiscutible:

- La organización comarcal es una agrupación de municipios de una misma
autonomía, al margen de las provincias.
- Debe existir una única relación por cada comarca, con adminlevel 7.

Cumpliendo lo dicho ya existía la relación
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6479877 para definir la comarca de
la Hoya de Huesca perfectamente editada y sin errores, como hija de la
relación Aragón, e independientemente de las provincias.

Ahora llega usted y crea dos relaciones nuevas, con adminlevel 7, y se
inventa sus nombres (ya que dichos territorios no existen):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10594434 y
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10594435

Esto es totalmente innecesario, e incumple las premisas antes expuestas. La
comarca acaba de quedar triplicada en su nivel 7 por otras dos entidades
que no existen. Por si fuera poco, utiliza etiquetas de su invención
"boundary administrative_fraction" y deja notas para justificar su visión
de las cosas. Incluso fue uno de los argumentos que utilizó para debatir
conmigo: "dejé una nota que lo dice". Que usted lo diga no es un argumento,
compréndalo.

Si se hubiera molestado en mirar el histórico de las relaciones de comarcas
en Aragón, habría visto que yo participé en todas,

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-18 Thread Philippe Verdy

Thanks for that reply. I tried to communicate twitch the only working
channel (the OSM talk list has various issues and automatically
unsubscribes many users for technical reasons, mainly issues on the
configuration of their servers: the MLM does not deliver mails to
subscribers, they are frequently bounced due to this).

I had attempted to use it several times. I used the changeset comments to
discuss that, but blocking me via the DWG (without even any contact via the
OSM personal messages or direct emails to me) is really unfair, and
precipitated. It's largely overreactive.

but my OSM block (repeated instantly without notice while I was talking)
has also the effect that it blocks all sorts of communication in OSM. I did
not want to hurt any one but try to make things consistently.

I know that comarcas are not defined nationally by law. But each region
(autonomous community) has an official status of autonomy that defines
their own divisions, which are the legacy provinces, but with now very
limited powers, and the comarcas and municipalities.

In addition municipalities can group together for some objectives of
cooperation (this is completely similar to French intercommunalities,
except that some of them are also recognized nationally and have a fiscal
autonomy and are even now required by law to be impelmetned with mandatory
missions; for optional missions, they can still cooperate openly, in open
groups mixing municipalities for their territory or part of them,
departments and regions as fund providers, or some private or semi-private
institutions like chambers of commerce or agriculture, or agencies for
managing natural parks).

I also know that despite the fact that provincial can no longer define
"comarcas" with adminsitrative status, they still promote "touristic"
comarcas, more or less linked to former traditional comarcas. As well the
state (ministries) defines its own delimitations for agriculture planning
and management of national and european funds. They should not call them
"comarcas" even if they have some limited functions (only for the relevant
missions that the state can define or plan itself, however the state has to
delegate the funds and empowering of these missions to the autonomous
communities to implement them; the provinces are a sort of legacy inherited
from the Franco period; lot of things have changed at end of the 1980's
when autonomous communities got powered).

Anyway, there's still the need to manage the transition. I've found that
not just Aragon, Galicia and Catalunya have defined comarcal delimitations,
and that other regions have also regulated this (this is part of their
autonomy status, including Asturias). Not all have decided completely their
comarcal delimiation, but Aragon has done it in a law which is easy to find.

For other regions, there's no better consistant comarcal definition than
those defined by the state, i.e. agrarian comarca, which are the first kind
of classification we can make, and which is also the one decided by the
Spanish community in Wikimedia (Wikipedia, Commons and Wikidata, however
not all is very well sorted and there are lot of works as all kinds of
comarcas are also described, documented, but not properly sorted by kind;
the variosu images and annexes present different point of views based on
one definition or another or different times). I just used what is the
currrent best classification (on which contributors find things easily, but
I do not exclude the existence of others.

But not sorting the municipalities in Spain does not help to locate them:
they have conflicting names, so they use various suffixes to disambiguate
them, and this is also complicated by the linguistic divisions (mainly: the
national official Spanish/Castillian language, plus Galician, Estremaduran,
Asturian, Basque, Catalan, and its minor Valencian and Balearic variants)
which is used in official names of municipalities (showing dual languages:
Spanish+regional, and some smaller parts with Occitan, or French in Val
d'Aran) and in some comarcas officialized by the region (this is the case
in Aragon).

Also what I did was to check the municipalities to make sure they don't
have broken holes (there's a complicate case in one of them, Xativa in the
Valencian community, is repeatedly broken as it is highly fragmented in a
"patchwork" way with many small fragments), ordering them, completing the
lists (there were some municipalities forgotten in provinces). Sorting them
allowed easier identification and was a step prior to classifying them and
making sure nothing was forgotten.

There's a case in Aragon where the law of comarcalization and end of 2006
forgets one municipality separated from Zaragoza some months before, i.e.
Villamayor de Gallego; the law lists Villanueva de Gallego only). But there
was a correction published in a later addenda by the region of Aragon in
its bulletin. I had to fix that as well by searches and verifications.

Even outside comarcas,

Re: [Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-18 Thread Miguel Sevilla-Callejo

Estimado Philippe,

Lo primero de todo es agradecerte el esfuerzo en atender este asunto y
unirte a la discusión sobre el tema de la comarcas que se ha iniciado por
tus ediciones en diferentes comunidades autónomas de España.

Te escribo en español pues nos comentas que lo entiendes y quiero ser más
preciso que en un tercer idioma que no es ninguno de los nuestros.

El tema de la división comarcal (por comarcas) es particular en España tal
y como te comenté en en uno de tus changesets . En realidad la situación es
diferente dependiendo de cada comunidad autónoma y no ha sido hasta muy
recientemente que se ha empezado a trasladar a OpenStreetMap y solo en
aquellos casos en los que se tenía buen conocimiento del mismo. La verdad
es que deberíamos haberlo documentado más concienzudamente en la Wiki.

Desde el punto de vista general de la organización territorial en España se
pasa del Estado a la Comunidad Autónoma y de esta a provincia y después al
municipio. La construcción de las comarcas y su desarrollo normativo ha
venido de la mano de las comunidades autónomas. Aragón y Cataluña han sido
las que realizaron una división comarcal en un principio y son las que
mejor conozco.

Aunque la Wikipedia es una fuente adecuada en muchos casos, para este, en
particular, creo que puede llevar a confusión. Ya nos ha pasado con
anterioridad que para algunos aspectos las definiciones enciclopédicas de
los colegas de Wikipedia no pueden transponer al mapa. Cuidado con esto. Es
mejor que consultes con nosotros pues somos una comunidad diferente.

Tradicionalmente han existido otras divisiones comarcales ligadas,
especialmente al temas agrarios, pero estas divisiones no son comparables
ni coinciden con las divisiones comarcales que se han desarrollado o se
están desarrollando dentro de casa comunidad autónoma.

En fin, es complicado y creo que no es comparable con la situación con
otros paises como Francia.

El que unilateralmente iniciaras algunas ediciones y no atendieras a los
criterios de los colaboradores locales ha desatado el malestar de la
comunidad y esto ha llevado a que la WDG terminara bloqueándote. Espero que
puedas entenderlo.

Te animo a leer lo que se ha escrito y recopilado sobre tus ediciones y la
polémica que has suscitado en esta misma lista de correos y espero que este
malentendido podamos solucionarlo con una mejora sustancial de la calidad
de nuestro mapa.

Sigue y lee este hilo:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-es/2020-January/017147.html

Recibe un cordial saludo.

--
*Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
Doctor en Geografía

PD. Si tienes problemas con la lista de correo puedes escribirme
personalmente para ponerte en contacto con la comunidad.

On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 21:34, Philippe Verdy  wrote:

> Hello, I'd like to follow up on the discussion started here about me.
>
> Note: I can read perfectly Spanish, but I won't talk in Spanish as my
> writing level is too poor and could lead to more misinterpretations.
>
> I was told by a Spanish user to map missing comarcas in Aragon and then I
> was blocked for that, even if there was no "error", and there was an
> ongoing talk with existing users that did not contacted me directly on OSM
> but prefer to complain to the DWG.
>
> It is clear from the talks (and it was agreed by the comments sent to the
> changeset) that this was only a misunderstanding. And that I did not break
> anything.
>
> I talked also bout the fact that there are several competing comarcal
> delimitations. They do not exist officially at national level, but are
> effective by laws and regulations in each region (short for autonomous
> community), and that for regions that are separated in different provinces,
> the comarcal decided by regions in their official bulletin of laws does not
> take into consideration the existing province boundaries.
>
> But there were several existing consensus for this topic in related
> projects (including, but not only, Wikidata, Spnish Wikipedia, and
> Commons). And the situation is not clear as all kinds of comarcas are mixed
> together or confused (sometimes with the same name depending on their type).
>
> Anyway there was a "most common" practice existing in relevant commnities
> about what was the more relevant (the situation is complicated by the fact
> that there are "natural comarcas" or "traditional comarcas" which have
> today no official status, of that sometimes coexist at several levels (a
> traditional  "comarca" may be seen as a subcomarca of another traditional
> comarca).
>
> I did not want to promote one kind of comarcas for another, but at least
> make the existing set consistent with itself for the most common use seen
> and discussed since long in various opendata projects). Allowing then the
> separate creation of these comarcas and properly tagging them to
> differentiate them when needed was what I started.
>
> But at least one comarcal division should exist in each region.
>
> I had proposed several things, I was talking

[Talk-es] hello, first message tried in this list

2020-01-18 Thread Philippe Verdy

Hello, I'd like to follow up on the discussion started here about me.

Note: I can read perfectly Spanish, but I won't talk in Spanish as my
writing level is too poor and could lead to more misinterpretations.

I was told by a Spanish user to map missing comarcas in Aragon and then I
was blocked for that, even if there was no "error", and there was an
ongoing talk with existing users that did not contacted me directly on OSM
but prefer to complain to the DWG.

It is clear from the talks (and it was agreed by the comments sent to the
changeset) that this was only a misunderstanding. And that I did not break
anything.

I talked also bout the fact that there are several competing comarcal
delimitations. They do not exist officially at national level, but are
effective by laws and regulations in each region (short for autonomous
community), and that for regions that are separated in different provinces,
the comarcal decided by regions in their official bulletin of laws does not
take into consideration the existing province boundaries.

But there were several existing consensus for this topic in related
projects (including, but not only, Wikidata, Spnish Wikipedia, and
Commons). And the situation is not clear as all kinds of comarcas are mixed
together or confused (sometimes with the same name depending on their type).

Anyway there was a "most common" practice existing in relevant commnities
about what was the more relevant (the situation is complicated by the fact
that there are "natural comarcas" or "traditional comarcas" which have
today no official status, of that sometimes coexist at several levels (a
traditional  "comarca" may be seen as a subcomarca of another traditional
comarca).

I did not want to promote one kind of comarcas for another, but at least
make the existing set consistent with itself for the most common use seen
and discussed since long in various opendata projects). Allowing then the
separate creation of these comarcas and properly tagging them to
differentiate them when needed was what I started.

But at least one comarcal division should exist in each region.

I had proposed several things, I was talking about them, but I was blocked
twice in a row during these talks (and was even blocked from continuing
these talks or even read the comments).



Now I've tried several times to join this list, but the OSM MLM has
technical problems as it does not comply to the enforcement measures taken
by various ISP (including very large ones): since about one year (March
2019) many ISP have enforced these rules, notably DKIM and DMARC for their
mails, but the OSM MLM breaks the DKIM and DMARC digital signatures (by
modifying digitally signed parts of emails: some MIME headers, the mail
subject line and/or the content body. To do that on messages signed with
DKIM or DMARC by their original sender, the MLLM must take some care: it
must sign again its own modifications and update its DNS to conform to DKIM
and DMARC. But it does not, only the SPF protocol is used, and then the SPF
protocol breaks again because the OSM MLM is not the original sender. Mails
sent for the OSM MLM are then bouncing.

And now recently the OSM MLM has been *silently* dropping subscriptions
from their lists. It has done that massively. Many users can no longer
communicate on the OSM lists. Worse, now they want to block users because
their mails are "bouncing". This makes communication in OMS tlak list very
dangerous if not impossible. People are blocked unfairly even if they did
not usurpate anyone. They are forced to change their email, can no longer
choose their provider or loose messages from the lists that they expected
to see.

I was blocked in OSM because of repeated failure to join this list to
continue this discussion. This is very unfair. I was ready to propose
things. But the DWG overrreacted and took its own decision very fast,
ignoring the complete facts.



About the case of Avila, there are were two different kinds of comarcas in
the same province and they would have overlapped. I'm not opposed at all
(in fact I'm in favour of this) to have these two comarcal delimitations,
provided they are distinguished (not use the same kind of tags).

As well I proposed to add a separate delimitation of mancommunidades, using
a model simialr to the intercommunalities used in France (i.e.
boundary=local_authority plus some Spanish specific tags like in France
with admin_type:FR=*). These are also important in Spain, for legal and
fiscal reasons and important in the day life of Spnish residents.

Spin is not more complicate than France or other countries. The pure
hierarchical of admin_levels is not entirely satisfied in any country,
there are exceptions everywhere fro different purposes. It's just a
convenient first kind of sorting things and getting consistant results in
searches or in statistics data, graphs and maps).

OSM should be open to various uses and not require a single view. OMS is
open and should be able

Re: [Talk-in] Hello from John

2019-10-20 Thread Ganesh D

Hello John,

This is a telegram channel of OSM India, which is pretty active.

Come, join. Here is the link: t.me/OSMIndia

Regards,

aintgd @ osm

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019, 22:23 John Mathew  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I'd like to introduce myself to the group. I'm located in Kochi, Kerala
> and I work as a management consultant. I'm quite interested in mapping and
> would like to et involved with OSM.
>
> I'm interested in knowing the different activities that OSM India has done
> so far. I did see a couple of mapping parties that have happened.
>
> Is there a page for OSM India?
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you all
>
> Thanks
> John
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-us] Hello World!

2019-03-07 Thread Clifford Snow

Wesley,
Welcome to OSM. It nice to seem someone from a local GIS community
contribute. I don't know of other mappers in your area, I'm in the PNW, but
I can suggest looking at http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/oooc to see who
maps around the area. Besides this mailing list we also have an active
Slack community which you can join at https://slack.openstreetmap.us/. I
should also plug attending our annual conference. This year it is being
held in Minneapolis from Sep. 6-8th. You could hop on I35 and drive all the
way there.

ESRI does have an editor for OSM, but we don't see many edits using it. Two
of the most popular editors are iD, a browser based editor and JOSM a stand
alone editor written in java. iD does have a nice walk though feature to
help you get started. Both editors are access to all of our imagery.
Besides Bing, we have Digital Globe, Mapbox and ESRI. JOSM has the ability
to load shapefiles which can be used to trace features or copy/paste them
into the OSM layer. Note that we have guidelines that need to be followed
if you wish to import (copy/paste) a large number of items.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Best,
Clifford

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 8:12 PM Stormwater  wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> My name is Wes Keller. I am the GIS Analyst for the City of Universal
> City. I would like to become active in the group and become a relied upon
> resource for information within Universal City’s Jurisdiction. If you are
> working in the San Antonio, Texas area please let me know so I can become
> acquainted with you. I would like to begin adding my content to Open Street
> Map. My preferred editing environment is ArcGIS Desktop. Any advice or
> assistance would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Wesley Keller
>
> GIS Analyst
>
> City of Universal City
>
>
>
> stormwa...@uctx.gov
>
> 210-659-0333 x722
>
>
>
> 2150 Universal City Blvd
>
> Universal City, TX 78148
>
> [image: CityLogoSmallJets]
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>

-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Hello World!

2019-03-06 Thread Stormwater

Hello,

My name is Wes Keller. I am the GIS Analyst for the City of Universal City. I 
would like to become active in the group and become a relied upon resource for 
information within Universal City's Jurisdiction. If you are working in the San 
Antonio, Texas area please let me know so I can become acquainted with you. I 
would like to begin adding my content to Open Street Map. My preferred editing 
environment is ArcGIS Desktop. Any advice or assistance would be greatly 
appreciated.

Wesley Keller
GIS Analyst
City of Universal City

stormwa...@uctx.gov
210-659-0333 x722

2150 Universal City Blvd
Universal City, TX 78148
[CityLogoSmallJets]

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

[talk-au] Hello!

2018-12-15 Thread David Wales



binTBjC3v2fxk.bin
Description: PGP/MIME Versions Identification


encrypted.asc
Description: OpenPGP encrypted message
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Hello!

2018-11-23 Thread Andrew Harvey

Yeah it's the one you linked to in your intro on talk-nz,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Catalogue

On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 at 06:19, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
> We generally focus on the road network and related tags / attributes first, 
> since Telenav tends to source search information (including addressing) from 
> sources other than OSM.
>
> That said, where there is an opportunity to help coordinate adding address 
> information to OSM, we will certainly consider it.
>
> Is there already some coordination going on, like collecting information 
> about datasets and licenses on an OSM wiki page?
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2018, at 22:10, Nick Hocking wrote:
>
> Hi Martijn,
>
> In my opinion the biggest improvement to Australian OSM data, to make it 
> usefull for automotive navigation, would be the addition of offline address 
> data.
>
> I believe that most states have address datasets available that are OSM 
> licence compliant and could be used for import. Would your people be 
> interested in helping out with that?
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Nick
>
> ___
> 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] Hello!

2018-11-23 Thread Martijn van Exel

Hi Nick,
We generally focus on the road network and related tags / attributes
first, since Telenav tends to source search information (including
addressing) from sources other than OSM.
That said, where there is an opportunity to help coordinate adding
address information to OSM, we will certainly consider it.
Is there already some coordination going on, like collecting information
about datasets and licenses on an OSM wiki page?--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018, at 22:10, Nick Hocking wrote:
> Hi Martijn,

> In my opinion the biggest improvement to Australian OSM data, to make
> it usefull for automotive navigation, would be the addition of offline
> address data.> I believe that most states have address datasets available 
> that are
> OSM licence compliant and could be used for import. Would your people
> be interested in helping out with that?> 

> Cheers

> Nick

> _
> 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] Hello!

2018-11-23 Thread Martijn van Exel

Andrew -- I am very glad to hear it! 
I would be delighted to help promote MapRoulette use more, please do let
me know if you have issues or you want help setting up a particular
challenge.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, Nov 23, 2018, at 02:56, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Hey Martijn, 
> 
> We ran a mapping session at the FOSS4G SotM Oceania Community Day
> today using maproulette. It worked really well spreading tasks out
> among the participants. Lot's of new people getting into using JOSM.> 
> I ran into an error trying to upload one particular GeoJSON files but
> apart from that it went well.> 
> On Thu., 8 Nov. 2018, 5:11 am Martijn van Exel > I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but
>> live in the U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced
>> myself on Slack where I talked a bit about Telenav looking at
>> possibly helping improve the map in Australia. I am just not sure if
>> there’s folks here who are not on Slack so I wanted to say hi. We’re
>> not making any improvements yet and we will keep you updated as our
>> plans materialize.>> 
>> We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we
>> typically work on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav>> 
>> Please do get in touch with any questions!
>> 
>> Happy mapping,
>> Martijn
>> ___
>>  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] Hello!

2018-11-23 Thread Andrew Harvey

Hey Martijn,

We ran a mapping session at the FOSS4G SotM Oceania Community Day today
using maproulette. It worked really well spreading tasks out among the
participants. Lot's of new people getting into using JOSM.

I ran into an error trying to upload one particular GeoJSON files but apart
from that it went well.

On Thu., 8 Nov. 2018, 5:11 am Martijn van Exel  I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but live in
> the U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced myself on Slack
> where I talked a bit about Telenav looking at possibly helping improve the
> map in Australia. I am just not sure if there’s folks here who are not on
> Slack so I wanted to say hi. We’re not making any improvements yet and we
> will keep you updated as our plans materialize.
>
> We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we typically
> work on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav
>
> Please do get in touch with any questions!
>
> Happy mapping,
> Martijn
> ___
> 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] Hello!

2018-11-22 Thread Nick Hocking

Hi Martijn,

In my opinion the biggest improvement to Australian OSM data, to make it
usefull for automotive navigation, would be the addition of offline address
data.

I believe that most states have address datasets available that are OSM
licence compliant and could be used for import. Would your people be
interested in helping out with that?


Cheers

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

Re: [talk-au] Hello!

2018-11-22 Thread Joel H.

I took a look at the Meet Your Mapper tool a while ago. Pretty
interesting stuff, most of mine comes from lots of building and wood
modeling.

As for the list, you should convert the dates into ISO 8601.

Joel


On 21/11/18 7:58 am, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> By the way - I started collecting the Top Mapper lists for various
> cities in Australia using my Meet Your Mapper tool[0]. If you find it
> interesting you can review them
> here: 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1axVjSpcCuD14AubLzA6E00fMxRLfXBHWPQvdijwsyUM/edit?usp=sharing
>  .
> It looks like you are the #1 mapper for the Brisbane area :) (when
> sorted by number of nodes last touched).
>
> These lists are based on data publicly available from Overpass, and I
> haven’t shared the link more widely, but if you object to having this
> data readily available to the community I will unshare it right away.
>
> Martijn
>
> [0] The tool is at https://mym.rtijn.org/ and the code is
> at https://github.com/mvexel/meetyourmappers, a diary entry is
> at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/44833 
>
>> On Nov 20, 2018, at 12:32 PM, Martijn van Exel > > wrote:
>>
>> Hi Joel, 
>>
>> Nice to make your virtual acquaintance. 
>>
>> I noticed there was a bit of discussion as to how to snap _link /
>> ramp roads to the main highway. 
>> The Telenav team uses the convention as described on the wiki,
>> snapping to the main road where the physical separation ends or
>> begins. So the way you described it yourself is the ‘right’ way, as
>> endorsed by the wiki.
>> (See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction
>>  ) 
>>
>> In general, our team follows the conventions as described on the
>> wiki, and if there’s no clear decision, we work with the community to
>> reach one, and edir the wiki afterwards. 
>>
>> I agree fully with your use of destination tags, but according to the
>> wiki they belong on the _link way and not on the junction
>> node, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination#Where_to_use.3F 
>>
>> Motorway junction nodes should be tagged even if there is no junction
>> number (not sure if those are common / signposted in Australia?) See
>> again https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction
>>  The
>> destination should not go on junction nodes but on the _link road.
>>
>> I have not used the placement=transition tag myself and am not sure
>> how it is used in applications, but interesting!
>>
>> I hope OpenStreetCam (and also Mapillary) will continue to be useful.
>> For signposts and speed limits these are pretty much indispensable
>> tools lacking official GIS data that has this info. Telenav created
>> and maintains OpenStreetCam as you may know. I am happy to answer any
>> questions about it that you may have. We are planning to hold a few
>> mapping competitions in the near future for a few cities in
>> Australia, I’ll make an announcement separately when we’re ready to
>> do that. (Early next year I think)
>>
>> Another tool I’ve found really useful for checking complete / correct
>> tagging of motorways is
>> CheckAutopista: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CheckAutopista .
>> For
>> M5: 
>> http://k1wiosm.github.io/checkautopista2/?id=7985811=-27.5645=152.8959=12
>>  
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>>> On Nov 8, 2018, at 12:06 AM, Joel H. >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for introducing yourself.
>>>
>>> A little while ago I fixed up the whole M5 motorway (and I believe
>>> some of the M3 as well) in Brisbane and wrote a diary post about it.
>>> Mostly with what I did.
>>>
>>> I was wondering whether what I did was correct, or if my method has
>>> given you any ideas?
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Joel%20Hansen/diary/43896
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/11/18 4:10 am, Martijn van Exel wrote:
 I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but
 live in the U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced
 myself on Slack where I talked a bit about Telenav looking at
 possibly helping improve the map in Australia. I am just not sure
 if there’s folks here who are not on Slack so I wanted to say hi.
 We’re not making any improvements yet and we will keep you updated
 as our plans materialize. 

 We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we
 typically work on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav 

 Please do get in touch with any questions!

 Happy mapping,
 Martijn

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

Re: [talk-au] Hello!

2018-11-20 Thread Martijn van Exel

By the way - I started collecting the Top Mapper lists for various cities in 
Australia using my Meet Your Mapper tool[0]. If you find it interesting you can 
review them here: 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1axVjSpcCuD14AubLzA6E00fMxRLfXBHWPQvdijwsyUM/edit?usp=sharing
 

 . It looks like you are the #1 mapper for the Brisbane area :) (when sorted by 
number of nodes last touched).

These lists are based on data publicly available from Overpass, and I haven’t 
shared the link more widely, but if you object to having this data readily 
available to the community I will unshare it right away.

Martijn

[0] The tool is at https://mym.rtijn.org/ and the code is at 
https://github.com/mvexel/meetyourmappers, a diary entry is at 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/44833 

> On Nov 20, 2018, at 12:32 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Hi Joel, 
> 
> Nice to make your virtual acquaintance. 
> 
> I noticed there was a bit of discussion as to how to snap _link / ramp roads 
> to the main highway. 
> The Telenav team uses the convention as described on the wiki, snapping to 
> the main road where the physical separation ends or begins. So the way you 
> described it yourself is the ‘right’ way, as endorsed by the wiki. (See 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction 
>  ) 
> 
> In general, our team follows the conventions as described on the wiki, and if 
> there’s no clear decision, we work with the community to reach one, and edir 
> the wiki afterwards. 
> 
> I agree fully with your use of destination tags, but according to the wiki 
> they belong on the _link way and not on the junction node, 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination#Where_to_use.3F 
>  
> 
> Motorway junction nodes should be tagged even if there is no junction number 
> (not sure if those are common / signposted in Australia?) See again 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction 
>  The 
> destination should not go on junction nodes but on the _link road.
> 
> I have not used the placement=transition tag myself and am not sure how it is 
> used in applications, but interesting!
> 
> I hope OpenStreetCam (and also Mapillary) will continue to be useful. For 
> signposts and speed limits these are pretty much indispensable tools lacking 
> official GIS data that has this info. Telenav created and maintains 
> OpenStreetCam as you may know. I am happy to answer any questions about it 
> that you may have. We are planning to hold a few mapping competitions in the 
> near future for a few cities in Australia, I’ll make an announcement 
> separately when we’re ready to do that. (Early next year I think)
> 
> Another tool I’ve found really useful for checking complete / correct tagging 
> of motorways is CheckAutopista: 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CheckAutopista 
>  . For M5: 
> http://k1wiosm.github.io/checkautopista2/?id=7985811=-27.5645=152.8959=12
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Martijn
> 
>> On Nov 8, 2018, at 12:06 AM, Joel H. > > wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for introducing yourself.
>> 
>> A little while ago I fixed up the whole M5 motorway (and I believe some of 
>> the M3 as well) in Brisbane and wrote a diary post about it. Mostly with 
>> what I did.
>> 
>> I was wondering whether what I did was correct, or if my method has given 
>> you any ideas?
>> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Joel%20Hansen/diary/43896 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/11/18 4:10 am, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>>> I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but live in 
>>> the U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced myself on Slack 
>>> where I talked a bit about Telenav looking at possibly helping improve the 
>>> map in Australia. I am just not sure if there’s folks here who are not on 
>>> Slack so I wanted to say hi. We’re not making any improvements yet and we 
>>> will keep you updated as our plans materialize. 
>>> 
>>> We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we typically 
>>> work on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Please do get in touch with any questions!
>>> 
>>> Happy mapping,
>>> Martijn
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au 
>>> 
>>

Re: [talk-au] Hello!

2018-11-20 Thread Martijn van Exel

Hi Joel, 

Nice to make your virtual acquaintance. 

I noticed there was a bit of discussion as to how to snap _link / ramp roads to 
the main highway. 
The Telenav team uses the convention as described on the wiki, snapping to the 
main road where the physical separation ends or begins. So the way you 
described it yourself is the ‘right’ way, as endorsed by the wiki. (See 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction 
 ) 

In general, our team follows the conventions as described on the wiki, and if 
there’s no clear decision, we work with the community to reach one, and edir 
the wiki afterwards. 

I agree fully with your use of destination tags, but according to the wiki they 
belong on the _link way and not on the junction node, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination#Where_to_use.3F 

Motorway junction nodes should be tagged even if there is no junction number 
(not sure if those are common / signposted in Australia?) See again 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction 
 The 
destination should not go on junction nodes but on the _link road.

I have not used the placement=transition tag myself and am not sure how it is 
used in applications, but interesting!

I hope OpenStreetCam (and also Mapillary) will continue to be useful. For 
signposts and speed limits these are pretty much indispensable tools lacking 
official GIS data that has this info. Telenav created and maintains 
OpenStreetCam as you may know. I am happy to answer any questions about it that 
you may have. We are planning to hold a few mapping competitions in the near 
future for a few cities in Australia, I’ll make an announcement separately when 
we’re ready to do that. (Early next year I think)

Another tool I’ve found really useful for checking complete / correct tagging 
of motorways is CheckAutopista: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CheckAutopista 
 . For M5: 
http://k1wiosm.github.io/checkautopista2/?id=7985811=-27.5645=152.8959=12

Martijn

> On Nov 8, 2018, at 12:06 AM, Joel H.  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for introducing yourself.
> 
> A little while ago I fixed up the whole M5 motorway (and I believe some of 
> the M3 as well) in Brisbane and wrote a diary post about it. Mostly with what 
> I did.
> 
> I was wondering whether what I did was correct, or if my method has given you 
> any ideas?
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Joel%20Hansen/diary/43896 
> 
> 
> On 8/11/18 4:10 am, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but live in 
>> the U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced myself on Slack 
>> where I talked a bit about Telenav looking at possibly helping improve the 
>> map in Australia. I am just not sure if there’s folks here who are not on 
>> Slack so I wanted to say hi. We’re not making any improvements yet and we 
>> will keep you updated as our plans materialize. 
>> 
>> We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we typically 
>> work on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav 
>>  
>> 
>> Please do get in touch with any questions!
>> 
>> Happy mapping,
>> Martijn
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello OSM world [Poitiers 86]

2018-11-10 Thread marc marc

Le 10. 11. 18 à 20:13, Jacques Lavignotte a écrit :

> Jacques à proximité de Poitiers (86)

bienvenue :) si tu as des questions, n'hésites pas
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk-fr] Hello OSM world [Poitiers 86]

2018-11-10 Thread Jacques Lavignotte


Bonjour,

Jacques à proximité de Poitiers (86)

Petit utilisateur de OSM via StreetComplete.

A l'écoute.

Jacques


--
GnuPg : C8F5B1E3 Because privacy matters.


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

Re: [talk-au] Hello!

2018-11-07 Thread Joel H.

Thanks for introducing yourself.

A little while ago I fixed up the whole M5 motorway (and I believe some
of the M3 as well) in Brisbane and wrote a diary post about it. Mostly
with what I did.

I was wondering whether what I did was correct, or if my method has
given you any ideas?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Joel%20Hansen/diary/43896


On 8/11/18 4:10 am, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but live
> in the U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced myself on
> Slack where I talked a bit about Telenav looking at possibly helping
> improve the map in Australia. I am just not sure if there’s folks here
> who are not on Slack so I wanted to say hi. We’re not making any
> improvements yet and we will keep you updated as our plans materialize. 
>
> We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we
> typically work on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav 
>
> Please do get in touch with any questions!
>
> Happy mapping,
> Martijn
>
> ___
> 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] Hello!

2018-11-07 Thread Martijn van Exel

I’m new on this list. My name is Martijn van Exel. I am Dutch but live in the 
U.S.A. where I work for Telenav. I already introduced myself on Slack where I 
talked a bit about Telenav looking at possibly helping improve the map in 
Australia. I am just not sure if there’s folks here who are not on Slack so I 
wanted to say hi. We’re not making any improvements yet and we will keep you 
updated as our plans materialize. 

We have a page on the OSM wiki that has more about how / what we typically work 
on in OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telenav 
 

Please do get in touch with any questions!

Happy mapping,
Martijn___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-10 Thread Arun Maharajan

There. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ArunMaharajan/diary/37945 
 
And some comments already.

> On 09-Feb-2016, at 15:04, Arun Maharajan  wrote:
> 
> Ah. Thats a good tip. Thanks.
> I will write an entry soon.
> 
>> On 09-Feb-2016, at 13:39, Arun Ganesh > > wrote:
>> 
>> This is such a great idea, really looking forward to this. A great place to 
>> share ideas around this with the wider osm community is by writing on the 
>> diary: https://www.openstreetmap.org/diary 
>>  and am sure mappers from around the 
>> world can help out.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Arun Ganesh
>> (planemad)  
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
> 

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-09 Thread Arun Ganesh

This is such a great idea, really looking forward to this. A great place to
share ideas around this with the wider osm community is by writing on the
diary: https://www.openstreetmap.org/diary and am sure mappers from around
the world can help out.

-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

He will know?

> On 08-Feb-2016, at 15:15, Paramvir Singh  wrote:
> 
> ameykatka...@gmail.com 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blackberry has the world's best email experience.
> 
> On 08-Feb-2016, at 2:43 PM, Arun Maharajan  > wrote:
> 
>> Hi Paramvir! 
>> Thanks for responding. Do you know others from Mumbai by any chance?
>> 
>>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 13:53, Paramvir Singh >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am from Mumbai.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Blackberry has the world's best email experience.
>>> 
 On 08-Feb-2016, at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan > wrote:
 
 Hello,
 
 I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible 
 collaboration and contribution.
 Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?
 
 Thank you.
 Arun
 ___
 Talk-in mailing list
 Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

Thank you Paramvir for the inputs. I will ask Amey.

> On 08-Feb-2016, at 16:06, Paramvir Singh  wrote:
> 
> It's possible but I don't know how to do that. Someone with engineering 
> skills can. 
> 
> 
> Blackberry has the world's best email experience.
> 
> On 08-Feb-2016, at 3:18 PM, Arun Maharajan  > wrote:
> 
>> Ah. Interesting. Thank you.
>> 
>> Just for information, is it possible to create a custom map of POIs which I 
>> can share with anyone?
>> For e.g. If i wish to collate all the local grocery stores in an area of 
>> Mumbai and I wish to share it with my friends, is that possible?
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> Arun
>> 
>>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 14:45, Arun Ganesh >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Welcome Arun! An interesting place to find collaborators is to look at who 
>>> has been contributing around you, check out the history tab 
>>>  to see if 
>>> anyone is active. 
>>> 
>>> Also in Bengaluru, I have found that there are many organizations that are 
>>> involved in urban studies and require a lot of map data, but do not know 
>>> from where to get them. You could try reaching out to such folks and check 
>>> if they are interested in hosting a mapping workshop where you could train 
>>> others and build a more active community in Mumbai.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan >> > wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible 
>>> collaboration and contribution.
>>> Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> Arun
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Arun Ganesh
>>> (planemad)  
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-08 Thread Paramvir Singh

ameykatka...@gmail.com




Blackberry has the world's best email experience.

> On 08-Feb-2016, at 2:43 PM, Arun Maharajan  wrote:
> 
> Hi Paramvir! 
> Thanks for responding. Do you know others from Mumbai by any chance?
> 
>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 13:53, Paramvir Singh  wrote:
>> 
>> I am from Mumbai.
>> 
>> 
>> Blackberry has the world's best email experience.
>> 
>>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible 
>>> collaboration and contribution.
>>> Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> Arun
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

Ah. Interesting. Thank you.

Just for information, is it possible to create a custom map of POIs which I can 
share with anyone?
For e.g. If i wish to collate all the local grocery stores in an area of Mumbai 
and I wish to share it with my friends, is that possible?

Thank you.
Arun

> On 08-Feb-2016, at 14:45, Arun Ganesh  wrote:
> 
> Welcome Arun! An interesting place to find collaborators is to look at who 
> has been contributing around you, check out the history tab 
>  to see if 
> anyone is active. 
> 
> Also in Bengaluru, I have found that there are many organizations that are 
> involved in urban studies and require a lot of map data, but do not know from 
> where to get them. You could try reaching out to such folks and check if they 
> are interested in hosting a mapping workshop where you could train others and 
> build a more active community in Mumbai.
> 
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan  > wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible collaboration 
> and contribution.
> Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?
> 
> Thank you.
> Arun
> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Arun Ganesh
> (planemad)  
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-08 Thread Paramvir Singh

It's possible but I don't know how to do that. Someone with engineering skills 
can. 


Blackberry has the world's best email experience.

> On 08-Feb-2016, at 3:18 PM, Arun Maharajan  wrote:
> 
> Ah. Interesting. Thank you.
> 
> Just for information, is it possible to create a custom map of POIs which I 
> can share with anyone?
> For e.g. If i wish to collate all the local grocery stores in an area of 
> Mumbai and I wish to share it with my friends, is that possible?
> 
> Thank you.
> Arun
> 
>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 14:45, Arun Ganesh  wrote:
>> 
>> Welcome Arun! An interesting place to find collaborators is to look at who 
>> has been contributing around you, check out the history tab to see if anyone 
>> is active. 
>> 
>> Also in Bengaluru, I have found that there are many organizations that are 
>> involved in urban studies and require a lot of map data, but do not know 
>> from where to get them. You could try reaching out to such folks and check 
>> if they are interested in hosting a mapping workshop where you could train 
>> others and build a more active community in Mumbai.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan  
>>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible 
>>> collaboration and contribution.
>>> Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> Arun
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Arun Ganesh
>> (planemad)
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

Hey Arun,

Thanks for the info. This could be useful actually.
Once i create my POI map, I can use Overpass to query them out and share the 
query results with the world. 
Am I correct?

Is there any trick to keep track of those places which I tag? Say can I use a 
tag with my name on it or some keyword on it which will uniquely only be mine? 

Thank you.
Arun

> On 08-Feb-2016, at 21:11, Arun Ganesh  wrote:
> 
> Arun, you can create a really quick map of such data using Overpass Turbo. 
> Try this query for any feature tagged shop=convenience in Mumbai: 
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ehx 
> 
> You can also write some simple MapCSS styling to control the marker colors 
> and size. I wrote about this in my diary a few weeks ago 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PlaneMad/diary/37429 
> 
> 
> Was this what you were looking for?
> 
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Arun Maharajan  > wrote:
> Thank you Paramvir for the inputs. I will ask Amey.
> 
>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 16:06, Paramvir Singh > > wrote:
>> 
>> It's possible but I don't know how to do that. Someone with engineering 
>> skills can. 
>> 
>> 
>> Blackberry has the world's best email experience.
>> 
>> On 08-Feb-2016, at 3:18 PM, Arun Maharajan > > wrote:
>> 
>>> Ah. Interesting. Thank you.
>>> 
>>> Just for information, is it possible to create a custom map of POIs which I 
>>> can share with anyone?
>>> For e.g. If i wish to collate all the local grocery stores in an area of 
>>> Mumbai and I wish to share it with my friends, is that possible?
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> Arun
>>> 
 On 08-Feb-2016, at 14:45, Arun Ganesh > wrote:

 Welcome Arun! An interesting place to find collaborators is to look at who 
 has been contributing around you, check out the history tab 
  to see if 
 anyone is active. 

 Also in Bengaluru, I have found that there are many organizations that are 
 involved in urban studies and require a lot of map data, but do not know 
 from where to get them. You could try reaching out to such folks and check 
 if they are interested in hosting a mapping workshop where you could train 
 others and build a more active community in Mumbai.

 On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan > wrote:
 Hello,

 I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible 
 collaboration and contribution.
 Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?

 Thank you.
 Arun

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

 -- 
 Arun Ganesh
 (planemad)  
 ___
 Talk-in mailing list
 Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 

>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Arun Ganesh
> (planemad)  
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

Got it. Thanks a lot.

Since I am new to this, if I may ask, apart from the data available in google 
maps, what kind of data is truly valuable and where OpenStreetMaps truly can 
make a difference? The question is for both the common man and for 
organisations.

> On 09-Feb-2016, at 10:47, Arun Ganesh  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Arun Maharajan  > wrote:
> Hey Arun,
> 
> Thanks for the info. This could be useful actually.
> Once i create my POI map, I can use Overpass to query them out and share the 
> query results with the world. 
> Am I correct?
> 
> Absolutely!
>  
> 
> Is there any trick to keep track of those places which I tag? Say can I use a 
> tag with my name on it or some keyword on it which will uniquely only be 
> mine? 
> 
> Every feature you modify will automatically capture your username in the 
> metadata, so there is no need for you to add anything extra. In Overpass 
> Turbo, click wizard and try `user:your_username shop=convenience` to match 
> all grocery stores that you added.
>  ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-08 Thread Arun Ganesh

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Arun Maharajan 
wrote:

> Hey Arun,
>
> Thanks for the info. This could be useful actually.
> Once i create my POI map, I can use Overpass to query them out and share
> the query results with the world.
> Am I correct?
>

Absolutely!

>
> Is there any trick to keep track of those places which I tag? Say can I
> use a tag with my name on it or some keyword on it which will uniquely only
> be mine?
>

Every feature you modify will automatically capture your username in the
metadata, so there is no need for you to add anything extra. In Overpass
Turbo, click wizard and try `user:your_username shop=convenience` to match
all grocery stores that you added.

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-08 Thread Arun Ganesh

Arun, you can create a really quick map of such data using Overpass Turbo.
Try this query for any feature tagged shop=convenience in Mumbai:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ehx

You can also write some simple MapCSS styling to control the marker colors
and size. I wrote about this in my diary a few weeks ago
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PlaneMad/diary/37429

Was this what you were looking for?

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Arun Maharajan 
wrote:

> Thank you Paramvir for the inputs. I will ask Amey.
>
> On 08-Feb-2016, at 16:06, Paramvir Singh  wrote:
>
> It's possible but I don't know how to do that. Someone with engineering
> skills can.
>
> 
> Blackberry has the world's best email experience.
>
> On 08-Feb-2016, at 3:18 PM, Arun Maharajan 
> wrote:
>
> Ah. Interesting. Thank you.
>
> Just for information, is it possible to create a custom map of POIs which
> I can share with anyone?
> For e.g. If i wish to collate all the local grocery stores in an area of
> Mumbai and I wish to share it with my friends, is that possible?
>
> Thank you.
> Arun
>
> On 08-Feb-2016, at 14:45, Arun Ganesh  wrote:
>
> Welcome Arun! An interesting place to find collaborators is to look at who
> has been contributing around you, check out the history tab
>  to see if
> anyone is active.
>
> Also in Bengaluru, I have found that there are many organizations that are
> involved in urban studies and require a lot of map data, but do not know
> from where to get them. You could try reaching out to such folks and check
> if they are interested in hosting a mapping workshop where you could train
> others and build a more active community in Mumbai.
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Arun Maharajan 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible
>> collaboration and contribution.
>> Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?
>>
>> Thank you.
>> Arun
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Arun Ganesh
> (planemad) 
> 
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>


-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 

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

[Talk-in] Hello

2016-02-07 Thread Arun Maharajan

Hello,

I just joined the list. Exploring open street maps for possible collaboration 
and contribution.
Is there anyone on this list from Mumbai?

Thank you.
Arun___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Hello! and offline OSM maps for India in Hindi

2015-10-18 Thread Anish Mangal

The experimentation was paused for a few days as a failing hard disk was
being replaced. If anyone wants to download generated tiles for offline
usage, you can find sets here:
http://home.braddock.com:28112/

The names of the .tar.gz files should convey the type of tileset. Eg:

world-osmbright-0-11-hi-india-borders.tar.gz

are tiles for the entire world in the OSMBright style from zoom levels
0-11, with hindi language lables wherever available and india specific
borders (kashmir, arunachal etc.)

the india specific tilesets are available upto higher zooms, so one could
atleast in theory, combine the world tiles till zoom 11 and use the india
specifc ones for higher levels.

next step is to have a base layer set without labels and overlay that with
tiles consisting just labels. haven't had the time to play around with the
xml for that.

In 2-3 weeks we should be at a stage to provide tilesets with custom
settings : lang, regions etc.

If you feel like jumping in and helping, pl do get in touch :-) The next
step is to allow basic GIS through the available open-source tools.
(currently looking at umap, openlayers, leaflet etc.)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Arun Ganesh 
wrote:

>
> If not, this will result in savings only while generating the tiles in
>> both rendering time and space. Deployments will likely use only their
>> specific language tiles. Nevertheless, this looks to be a promising way of
>> setting things up. I'm guessing leaflet or similar won't have any issue
>> displaying multiple layers on top of one another, and the additional cpu
>> costs of doing so would not be so great.
>>
>
> Yup, overlaying multiple transparent tilesets is quite trivial. You can
> already see it in action on openstreetmap.in when you enable overlays
> from the switcher on the left.
>
> --
> Arun Ganesh
> (planemad) 
> 
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Hello! and offline OSM maps for India in Hindi

2015-10-08 Thread Anish Mangal

That sounds like a neat idea. I've raised a question in the xsce community
whether individual deployments would require maps in two or more languages.
Conveniently, we have a call discussing this with various deployers and
developers in two days' time[1].

If not, this will result in savings only while generating the tiles in both
rendering time and space. Deployments will likely use only their specific
language tiles. Nevertheless, this looks to be a promising way of setting
things up. I'm guessing leaflet or similar won't have any issue displaying
multiple layers on top of one another, and the additional cpu costs of
doing so would not be so great.

[1] http://tinyurl.com/xsceminutes

--
Anish

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Arun Ganesh  wrote:

> So awesome to see this happening, Anish. The multilingual tiles is going
> to be quite a challenge especially if constrained by server resources as
> you would need to generate a different version of the tile for each
> language, and that can quickly multiply your storage and rendering
> requirements.
>
> One approach might be to render different versions of transparent label
> tiles that can be overlayed on base map tiles based on the language you
> choose. Have not seen a reasonable solution to this in the past.
>
> --
> Arun Ganesh
> (planemad) 
> 
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Hello! and offline OSM maps for India in Hindi

2015-10-08 Thread Arun Ganesh

> If not, this will result in savings only while generating the tiles in
> both rendering time and space. Deployments will likely use only their
> specific language tiles. Nevertheless, this looks to be a promising way of
> setting things up. I'm guessing leaflet or similar won't have any issue
> displaying multiple layers on top of one another, and the additional cpu
> costs of doing so would not be so great.
>

Yup, overlaying multiple transparent tilesets is quite trivial. You can
already see it in action on openstreetmap.in when you enable overlays from
the switcher on the left.

-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello! and offline OSM maps for India in Hindi

2015-10-08 Thread Arun Ganesh

So awesome to see this happening, Anish. The multilingual tiles is going to
be quite a challenge especially if constrained by server resources as you
would need to generate a different version of the tile for each language,
and that can quickly multiply your storage and rendering requirements.

One approach might be to render different versions of transparent label
tiles that can be overlayed on base map tiles based on the language you
choose. Have not seen a reasonable solution to this in the past.

-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 

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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello everyone!

2014-11-18 Thread Paramvir Singh

Hello Alex!

Welcome to India. I work out of Mumbai and would love to drop by your office in 
Bangalore (Bengaluru, as it's called now), whenever there. Do let me know where 
your office office.

I have been a fan of MapBox and its toolkits for designing Maps...

Param


Blackberry has the world's best email experience.

 On 18-Nov-2014, at 11:19 pm, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote:
 
 I just subscribed to the list and wanted to say hello. I'm Alex with the 
 Mapbox team, OpenStreetMap is one of the most important datasets we use in 
 our map platform that powers maps from Pinterest to Github to non profits and 
 weekend warrior's pet projects.
 
 We're opening an office in Bengaluru and I'm here all week with my colleagues 
 Shiv and Eric to meet people and set up shop.
 
 There are two OSM related events this week [1] in BLR that I hope some of you 
 will be able to attend, but otherwise, I just wanted to send a quick blip 
 over the wire, say I'm here and that I'm looking forward to meeting you.
 
 Cheers!
 
 [1]
 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/26268
 https://www.mapbox.com/blog/hello-india/
 ___
 Talk-in mailing list
 Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Hello everyone!

2014-11-18 Thread Naveen Francis

Welcome to India . Alex and team 

On 18 November 2014 23:19, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote:

 I just subscribed to the list and wanted to say hello. I'm Alex with the
 Mapbox team, OpenStreetMap is one of the most important datasets we use in
 our map platform that powers maps from Pinterest to Github to non profits
 and weekend warrior's pet projects.

 We're opening an office in Bengaluru and I'm here all week with my
 colleagues Shiv and Eric to meet people and set up shop.

 There are two OSM related events this week [1] in BLR that I hope some of
 you will be able to attend, but otherwise, I just wanted to send a quick
 blip over the wire, say I'm here and that I'm looking forward to meeting
 you.

 Cheers!

 [1]

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/26268
 https://www.mapbox.com/blog/hello-india/

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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Hello everyone!

2014-11-18 Thread Ravi Kumar

Good to know that.
We have an event at Mysuru(Mysure) 3,4 Dec 2014 mapping Mysore. Mysuru is 2 hrs
from Banguluru. It is an initiation to finally go for a website for society like
mana-rajahmundry.org.
Pl participate ..
Ravi Kumar
Secretary, OSGeo India

On Tue, 11/18/14, Naveen Francis navee...@gmail.com wrote:

Subject: Re: [Talk-in] Hello everyone!
To: OpenStreetMap in India talk-in@openstreetmap.org
Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 7:06 PM

Welcome to
India . Alex and team

On 18 November 2014 23:19,
Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com
wrote:
I just
subscribed to the list and wanted to say hello. I'm Alex
with the Mapbox team, OpenStreetMap is one of the most
important datasets we use in our map platform that powers
maps from Pinterest to Github to non profits and weekend
warrior's pet projects.
We're opening an office in
Bengaluru and I'm here all week with my colleagues Shiv
and Eric to meet people and set up shop.
There are two OSM related events
this week [1] in BLR that I hope some of you will be able to
attend, but otherwise, I just wanted to send a quick blip
over the wire, say I'm here and that I'm looking
forward to meeting you.
Cheers!
[1]

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/26268https://www.mapbox.com/blog/hello-india/

___

Talk-in mailing list

Talk-in@openstreetmap.org

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

-Inline Attachment Follows-

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello

2013-08-14 Thread Al Harawi

Bonjour tout le monde,

Le problème semble lié aux tuiles d'OSM, pas à mes modifications.

Bonne journée,
Amicalement,
Al

Le 13 août 2013 à 23:00, Al Harawi a écrit :

 
 Le 13 août 2013 à 22:55, Christian Quest a écrit :
 
 Ca vient peut être des serveurs OSM-FR, on en a plusieurs en vacances
 en ce moment :(
 
 Demain j'en remplace un (osm3) à Cachan...
 
 
 Visiblement, c'est OSM1 osm1.crans.org… qui est en vacances 
 
 -- 
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
 Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk-fr] Hello

Bonjour à tous,

Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques contributions 
la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un petit problème en ce 
moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur d'édition que j'ai fait pour une 
foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun aurait une idée ?

Merci d'avance,
Amicalement,
Al

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello

2013-08-13 Thread Jean-Marc Liotier

On 08/13/2013 07:35 PM, Al Harawi wrote:
 Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques 
 contributions la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un petit 
 problème en ce moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur d'édition que 
 j'ai fait pour une foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun aurait une idée ?

Bienvenue ! Si tu nous explique la nature du problème - éventuellement
avec un lien vers le lieu (via http://www.openstreetmap.org) alors il
est très probable que tu trouveras de l'aide ici.

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello


Le 13 août 2013 à 18:38, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :

 On 08/13/2013 07:35 PM, Al Harawi wrote:
 Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques 
 contributions la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un petit 
 problème en ce moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur d'édition que 
 j'ai fait pour une foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun aurait une idée ?
 
 Bienvenue !

Merci ! ;-)

 Si tu nous explique la nature du problème - éventuellement
 avec un lien vers le lieu (via http://www.openstreetmap.org) alors il
 est très probable que tu trouveras de l'aide ici.
 

Pour le problème, il se passe ici

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17331849
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.6308/1.9400

En modifiant le contour de la foret dénommé le Bois de Puy-blanc, j'ai 
visiblement inversé le tracé, et en cherchant à corriger l'erreur, j'ai 
malencontreusement supprimer la foret. Je l'ai recrée mais impossible de 
retrouver l'aire correcte de la forêt en question.
L'ensemble du secteur est maintenant en zone forestière est c'est pas top.

Milles excuses pour tout ce bazar !

Al


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



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello

2013-08-13 Thread Christian Quest

Qd as-tu supprimé ce plan d'eau ? Je ne vois pas de suppression dans
tes changesets récents.

Le 13 août 2013 19:46, Al Harawi alhar...@myopera.com a écrit :

 Le 13 août 2013 à 18:38, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :

 On 08/13/2013 07:35 PM, Al Harawi wrote:
 Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques 
 contributions la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un petit 
 problème en ce moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur d'édition que 
 j'ai fait pour une foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun aurait une idée ?

 Bienvenue !

 Merci ! ;-)

 Si tu nous explique la nature du problème - éventuellement
 avec un lien vers le lieu (via http://www.openstreetmap.org) alors il
 est très probable que tu trouveras de l'aide ici.


 Pour le problème, il se passe ici

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17331849
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.6308/1.9400

 En modifiant le contour de la foret dénommé le Bois de Puy-blanc, j'ai 
 visiblement inversé le tracé, et en cherchant à corriger l'erreur, j'ai 
 malencontreusement supprimer la foret. Je l'ai recrée mais impossible de 
 retrouver l'aire correcte de la forêt en question.
 L'ensemble du secteur est maintenant en zone forestière est c'est pas top.

 Milles excuses pour tout ce bazar !

 Al


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


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




-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello


Le 13 août 2013 à 19:05, Christian Quest a écrit :

 Qd as-tu supprimé ce plan d'eau ? Je ne vois pas de suppression dans
 tes changesets récents.
 

Non, j'ai ajouté les plans d'eau, chemins, édifices, haies, etc.
C'est le bois que j'ai malencontreusement supprimé : 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42072776

 Le 13 août 2013 19:46, Al Harawi alhar...@myopera.com a écrit :
 
 Le 13 août 2013 à 18:38, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :
 
 On 08/13/2013 07:35 PM, Al Harawi wrote:
 Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques 
 contributions la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un 
 petit problème en ce moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur 
 d'édition que j'ai fait pour une foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun 
 aurait une idée ?
 
 Bienvenue !
 
 Merci ! ;-)
 
 Si tu nous explique la nature du problème - éventuellement
 avec un lien vers le lieu (via http://www.openstreetmap.org) alors il
 est très probable que tu trouveras de l'aide ici.
 
 
 Pour le problème, il se passe ici
 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17331849
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.6308/1.9400
 
 En modifiant le contour de la foret dénommé le Bois de Puy-blanc, j'ai 
 visiblement inversé le tracé, et en cherchant à corriger l'erreur, j'ai 
 malencontreusement supprimer la foret. Je l'ai recrée mais impossible de 
 retrouver l'aire correcte de la forêt en question.
 L'ensemble du secteur est maintenant en zone forestière est c'est pas top.
 
 Milles excuses pour tout ce bazar !
 
 Al
 
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
 Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello

2013-08-13 Thread Christian Quest

ok, je regarde...

sinon, une remarque, area=yes est inutile sur les bâtiment, landuse,
etc... c'est toi qui les ajoute ou iD ?


Le 13 août 2013 20:10, Al Harawi alhar...@myopera.com a écrit :

 Le 13 août 2013 à 19:05, Christian Quest a écrit :

 Qd as-tu supprimé ce plan d'eau ? Je ne vois pas de suppression dans
 tes changesets récents.


 Non, j'ai ajouté les plans d'eau, chemins, édifices, haies, etc.
 C'est le bois que j'ai malencontreusement supprimé : 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42072776

 Le 13 août 2013 19:46, Al Harawi alhar...@myopera.com a écrit :

 Le 13 août 2013 à 18:38, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :

 On 08/13/2013 07:35 PM, Al Harawi wrote:
 Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques 
 contributions la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un 
 petit problème en ce moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur 
 d'édition que j'ai fait pour une foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun 
 aurait une idée ?

 Bienvenue !

 Merci ! ;-)

 Si tu nous explique la nature du problème - éventuellement
 avec un lien vers le lieu (via http://www.openstreetmap.org) alors il
 est très probable que tu trouveras de l'aide ici.


 Pour le problème, il se passe ici

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17331849
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.6308/1.9400

 En modifiant le contour de la foret dénommé le Bois de Puy-blanc, j'ai 
 visiblement inversé le tracé, et en cherchant à corriger l'erreur, j'ai 
 malencontreusement supprimer la foret. Je l'ai recrée mais impossible de 
 retrouver l'aire correcte de la forêt en question.
 L'ensemble du secteur est maintenant en zone forestière est c'est pas top.

 Milles excuses pour tout ce bazar !

 Al


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


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




 --
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
 Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/

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


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




-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello


Le 13 août 2013 à 19:12, Christian Quest a écrit :

 ok, je regarde...
 
 sinon, une remarque, area=yes est inutile sur les bâtiment, landuse,
 etc... c'est toi qui les ajoute ou iD ?
 

Ah non, c'est pas moi. Ce doit être iD qui les rajoute tout seul.

 
 Le 13 août 2013 20:10, Al Harawi alhar...@myopera.com a écrit :
 
 Le 13 août 2013 à 19:05, Christian Quest a écrit :
 
 Qd as-tu supprimé ce plan d'eau ? Je ne vois pas de suppression dans
 tes changesets récents.
 
 
 Non, j'ai ajouté les plans d'eau, chemins, édifices, haies, etc.
 C'est le bois que j'ai malencontreusement supprimé : 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42072776
 
 Le 13 août 2013 19:46, Al Harawi alhar...@myopera.com a écrit :
 
 Le 13 août 2013 à 18:38, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :
 
 On 08/13/2013 07:35 PM, Al Harawi wrote:
 Je viens de rejoindre la mailing list. J'ai déjà apporté quelques 
 contributions la OSM pour les cartes FR et EC, mais je rencontre un 
 petit problème en ce moment : je n'arrive pas à corriger une erreur 
 d'édition que j'ai fait pour une foret via l'editeur intégré ID. Qqun 
 aurait une idée ?
 
 Bienvenue !
 
 Merci ! ;-)
 
 Si tu nous explique la nature du problème - éventuellement
 avec un lien vers le lieu (via http://www.openstreetmap.org) alors il
 est très probable que tu trouveras de l'aide ici.
 
 
 Pour le problème, il se passe ici
 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17331849
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.6308/1.9400
 
 En modifiant le contour de la foret dénommé le Bois de Puy-blanc, j'ai 
 visiblement inversé le tracé, et en cherchant à corriger l'erreur, j'ai 
 malencontreusement supprimer la foret. Je l'ai recrée mais impossible de 
 retrouver l'aire correcte de la forêt en question.
 L'ensemble du secteur est maintenant en zone forestière est c'est pas top.
 
 Milles excuses pour tout ce bazar !
 
 Al
 
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 
 
 
 --
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
 Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
 Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/
 
 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hello