[talk-ph] Alaminos, Pangasinan barangay borders

[Glen Scott]

Hi folks,

Awesome to see the suspect Alaminos barangay borders added some time back
were removed and I now notice some much better ones have been added.  I see
some differences to the Alaminos City Hall maps, but now I'm wondering if
the City Hall maps are actually a simplification.

I checked a couple of these against the 1962 land survey maps I got from
DENR, but some borders don't even exist on those maps! I'm advised some
barangays were added in the 80's, so I conclude the land survey maps are
just too old to trust. (though DENR were still using them...)

If I look at the borders in OSM edit I don't see any detail or the source,
but that's maybe just due to my access level. Does anyone know the source
of these boundaries? (or can see the source?). If the source is reliable
I'd like to point the City Hall planning and development peeps to these OSM
boundaries. The last maps I got from them were done in Manifold System
which is apparently a GIS software - I can't imagine why such software
would create inconsistently simplified boundaries.

Cheers
Glen Scott
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] shop=general for general merchandise stores

[Glen Scott]

Variety Store?

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 15:43, Jherome Miguel  wrote:

> I’ve been using shop=general to tag general merchandise stores – a type of
> store that is of a size in between sari-sari stores and
> groceries/supermarkets, sells everyday staples like groceries, home goods,
> stationery, and some clothes, construction supplies, farm supplies, and
> hardware, and commonly found in commercial centers of many towns and small
> cities, as well as barangays. Some of these are clearly marked as general
> merchandise stores in their signs, and some are named like sari-saris, the
> name being in the format “[Owner’s first or last name] Store”. We currently
> don’t have an recommended tag for it, and except for those that have
> “General Merchandise” on their name and sells a general line of retail
> goods but is not essential in nature, is tagged the same way as sari-saris
> with shop=convenience. Is this a good tagging idea? Any further suggested
> tags?
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Fwd: Fwd: Another user possibly illegal copying from GMaps

[Glen Scott]

Wow, is this the problem of OSM where there needs to be an element of
trust. Perhaps find a blatantly incorrect POI and compare?

On Fri, 2 Jul 2021 at 18:06, Erwin Olario  wrote:

> CC'ing the list of their latest response: https://imgur.com/ml0IR2e
>
> We hire third-parties who are from the area being mapped to tag the
>> location of establishments, landmarks, and other government offices. They
>> will send to us the coordinates and the names of the places, and will be
>> encoded accordingly by a third-party.
>>
>> The chances of having the same establishments, landmarks, and government
>> offices on the same location as Google is for the basic reason that we are
>> mapping the same areas on planet Earth. Unless, Google mapped an alternate
>> universe that would result in different mapping of the same locality.
>>
> FWIW, I previously invited them to engage with the LoCo through an online
> meeting, but instead got this response.
>
> FYI.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> » email: erwin@ *n**gnu**it**y**.xyz*
> 
> » mobile: https://t.me/GOwin
> » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE 3A93
> D56B
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 12:19 PM Jherome Miguel 
> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, dapat send to all.
>>
>> -- Forwarded message -
>> From: Jherome Miguel 
>> Date: Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:06 PM
>> Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Fwd: Another user possibly illegal copying from
>> GMaps
>> To: Erwin Olario 
>>
>>
>> Naghihintay pa ako ng reply sa huli kong PM with Jan Rei. Sana may linaw
>> na ang kaso nung kay JP Baje, kung member sya ng PARA mapping team. Di ko
>> maiwasang mapa-PI at map-lk nang nakita ko ang mga edits ni Jan Rei.
>> Salamat na we have now a direct contact with a PARA map editor.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 9:59 PM Erwin Olario  wrote:
>>
>>> Sa palagay ko, ang pinaka-maganda ay makapag-setup ng dialogue sa
>>> grupong (?) ito, para matulungan silang malinawan sa mga alituntunin ng
>>> OSM, kung yun nga talaga ang isyu dito.
>>>
>>> Sumagot ulit yung user na kausap ko, at sinasabi niyang hindi daw
>>> kinopya sa ibang mapa yung mga edits niya, at kinalap daw niya yon sa ibang
>>> sources. Hiniling kong mag-bigay siya ng karagdagan pang detalye sa proseso
>>> nila.
>>>
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> » email: erwin@ *n**gnu**it**y**.xyz*
>>> 
>>> » mobile: https://t.me/GOwin
>>> » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE 3A93
>>> D56B
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 11:39 AM Jherome Miguel 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Kinakausap ko na rin ang user kung kilala rin niya yung si “JPBaje”.
 Lumalakas ang kutob ko na editor rin sya for PARA, lalo’t hindi siya
 nag-reply sa una kong mga PM sa kanya bago nirevert ang lahat ng edits niya
 at siya’y binlock ng DWG.

 On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:40 PM Erwin Olario  wrote:

> I also got a reply, and the username[0] has been changed.
>
> The user acknowledged their affiliation with the Para app, but did not
> disclose the source of their edits.
>
> I have previously been in touch with officers from this corporation,
> and in the past, they promised that they will abide by OSM rules.  If you
> get any permission to share that number, I'm willing to discuss this
> further with their users
>
> [0]:
> https://osmcha.org/filters?aoi=68b0b447-b692-47cd-ac6d-7be521e084b4
>
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> » email: erwin@ *n**gnu**it**y**.xyz*
> 
> » mobile: https://t.me/GOwin
> » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE
> 3A93 D56B
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 10:07 AM Jherome Miguel <
> jheromemig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message -
>> From: Jherome Miguel 
>> Date: Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: Another user possibly illegal copying from GMaps
>> To: Eugene Alvin Villar 
>>
>>
>> Just received reply (in Tagalog) from user, asking me to contact by
>> phone, but as I’m in Canada, could discuss it on-site instead. I’m in a
>> middle of a mass revert of edits around BF Homes when I received their 
>> PM.
>>
> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>>
> ___
 talk-ph mailing list
 talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

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

[talk-ph] Alaminos Barangay borders

[Glen Scott]

Hi PH mapping folks,
I was just in a boring online meeting and had a chance to look at OSM (been
too busy to get to it for a while).  I noticed Barangay borders have been
added to Alaminos (and between Alaminos and other Pangasinan cities), yet
these are radically different to either Alaminos Town Hall maps or the
Cadastal survey map set I got from DENR.

The borders were added by VMPanes, I'll try to contact VMPanes to establish
the basis of the borders. I think that no borders is better than incorrect
borders, unfortunately I haven't had the time to stitch the cadastral set
together in electronic format to arrive at a more accurate border than the
Alaminos City Hall map, which is at quite a small scale.

Cheers
Glen
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Tagging of implied speed limits

[Glen Scott]

My limited experience in a limited number of provincial areas:

Local PNP Sargent told me that they don't enforce speed. The city's speed
limit (built up area) is 20 km/h everywhere (as set by the city council);
this is generally ignored.

Without speed tagging, auto-routing on a GPS is useless, it simply takes
the shortest route over the slowest roads.

Out of the city proper, the classification of the road is not a great
indicator of the comfortable speed of the road - some significant routes
can be in poor condition (sealed or un-sealed). The "legal" speed is often
greater than the comfortably achievable speed.

Strict tagging of road speeds based on their classification will lead to
some poor auto-routing, where the GPS takes a bad road. I've been a bit
naughty and have been guilty of tagging roads in a way that forces the GPS
to take to best route, regardless of classification (i.e. tag to quality).
I know this is not an appropriate tagging recipe  just putting it out
there that some wriggle room is needed if auto-routing in rural areas is
to  be considered. Maybe an informal thing?







On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 4:33 PM Jherome Miguel 
wrote:

> While there haven't been a decision on revising the existing
> classifications
> for roads, I am also considering discussing a tagging scheme for implied
> speed limits (those not indicated by a sign). I have been experimenting
> with tagging of those unsigned speed limits on some of my last edits, but
> I'm also thinking of a standard for the country.
>
> 
>
> The default speed limits for the Philippines (as codified in the Land
> Transportation and Traffic Code or Republic Act 4136) are as follows
>
> 80 kph (50 for heavy trucks and buses) - "open country" roads
> 40 kph (30 for trucks and buses) - "through" roads within built-up area
> 30 kph - "non-through" roads within built-up areas
> 20 kph - crowded streets
>
> In addition, many major rural roads may have lower implied limits (e.g. 40
> kph) due to factors such as pedestrians walking on the road, and some major
> urban roads may have a higher limit (e.g. 60 for multi-lane roads or other
> roads where pedestrians don't frequently cross or walk alongside vehicles).
>
> Expressways are not covered by RA 4136, but there seems to be these
> defaults (almost all of these explicitly marked by standard circular signs):
>
> 100 (80 for heavy trucks and buses) - rural
> 80 - urban
> 60 - minimum
>
> 
>
> These defaults, in turn, corresponds to these possible values for OSM
> (along with the corresponding numeric value:
>
> - PH:rural - 80
> - PH:urban - 30 (minor through roads within cities/municipalities,
> generally those classified tertiary), 40 (all other major roads), 60
> (higher-quality roads, generally multi-lane)
> -PH:living_street - 20 (note: includes anything classified unclassified,
> residential and service, not only those classified living_street)
>
> Important questions are:
>
> 1.) How should we handle the RA 4136 categories: source:maxspeed= or
> maxspeed:type=?
> 2.) Is this already a fine proposal, or this may need some tweaking?
>
> --TagaSanPedroAko
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[talk-ph] Satellite imagery

[Glen Scott]

Sorry guys, I've been busy and not paying any attention to OSM of late, but
just has a look and see Digitalglobe layers have been replaced by Maxar
(I'm using iD). Google tells me Maxar bought Digitalglobe some time back.
I'm now seeing water where I stood in a car park in early 2018, and where
Digitalglobe was showing a car park. A few of my buildings are now in the
sea. I think the Maxar imagery is maybe 4 years older than Digitalglobe.

Any tricks to see the newer imagery (that we had)? Or just hard luck? Sorry
if this has been discussed before...

Cheers

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

Re: [talk-ph] Grab in conflict with Thailand OSM community

[Glen Scott]

Is it a concern that they keep referring to Bing imagery "We will also use
Bing imagery to ensure there are no missing roads". In the parts I've
looked at, some roads on Bing just don't exist any more! Bing is good for
coastline where there has been no human development, but not good for
anything else. Using Bing imagery to check for roads will create the
classic GPS nav problem - OLD DATA = WRONG WAY!

Cheers
Glen

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 5:38 PM Eugene Alvin Villar 
wrote:

> Hi JP,
>
> Grab/Global Logic's mapping team have reached out to the OSMPH community
> to inform and coordinate with us their mapping efforts for the Metro
> Manila[1][2], San Fernando[3], Binalonan[4] and Metro Cebu[5] areas. They
> have also participated in the OSMPH and OSM Asia Telegram group chats to
> ask quick questions. Based on spot checking of their work in the
> Philippines, it seems that they are doing a good enough job with the
> mapping of the road network.
>
> [1]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2018-August/006288.html
> [2]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2018-August/006291.html
> [3]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2018-August/006299.html
> [4]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2018-August/006300.html
> [5]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2018-October/006317.html
>
> Regards,
> Eugene
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 7:22 AM JP Loh  wrote:
>
>> Are there known incidents here?
>>
>> Techcrunch article:
>> https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/19/grab-maps-osm-thailand-southeast-asia/
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] intro to Kaart initiative in PH

[Glen Scott]

Nothing to offer by my own personal experiences

I'm a regular user of GPS for navigation at home (Australia) in urban and
country environments.  I've noted in OSM (Philippines - specifically N-W
Pangasinan) two things that are undefined in 99% of roads, but used by the
routing engine - road surface and speed limit. With 99% of roads undefined
for surface and speed limit the route chosen by the GPS will be a lottery
as far as driving experience goes.  I guess the most critical would be the
ability to chose to avoid unpaved roads?  I've had a number of Garmin GPSs
and they always assume 80 km/h where the map has no defined limit.  Maybe
10+ years ago I had some experiences where the GPS would attempt to take me
on "short-cuts" over long-unused dirt tracks (in preference to the
highway!).  I guess this is the potential result of not defining the
surface at the very least.  Hard to tell the speed limit from satellite
imagery!

In the urban environment the most common and frustrating errors (Garmin
maps) would be undefined one-way streets.

My one attempt to navigate in the Philippines on OSM (~2008-2009) led me
into a military camp and some interested military personnel who directed me
back out the way I came in!  Gates are important but no always so easy to
see from space

Cheers
Glen

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Erwin Olario  wrote:

>
> Thank you for bringing this up, Maning. This is also a concern I've
> discussed with other mappers in the past, and this doesn't just apply to
> road navigation, but with other features, as well.
>
> The Mapbox data team is a pioneer in this road network initiatives in OSM,
> and we look up to your team for inspiration. 
>
> Our current (in the next few months) interest in PH road network
> improvement are low-hanging fruits (missing geometries, restrictions,
> turning lanes, etc), but in due time, we'd like to explore how to further
> improve road network data from OSM for naviation, etc. PH is only one of
> the many countries we're working in, so we need a more inclusive
> understanding of tagging nuances, too.
>
> I hope such a discussion can  attract more inputs from the wider
> community, especially those who've been lurking in the background, who
> follows the exchanges here, but for reasons known only to them, doesn't
> engage publicly.
>
> /Erwin
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:35 PM maning sambale 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Erwin,
>>
>> Thanks for leading this work.  As many of you know, I work in Mapbox
>> and my primary focus is to make OSM navigable.
>> I wonder what would be the best approach in the context of driving in
>> the Philippines.
>> Would love to share notes and approaches.  One thing I have in mind (I
>> shared this during the meetup), while every country
>> has specific nuances tagging, there is a danger of making the tags too
>> specific as its difficult to create routing engines for each country.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Erwin Olario  wrote:
>> > Happy new year everyone.
>> >
>> > In case some of you are wondering about some of my recent changeset
>> comments
>> > with the phrase,  "Better PH data with #Kaart", I've recently linked up
>> with
>> > Kaart [0], and their initiative to improve OSM data in the Philippines.
>> >
>> > One of the things we'd like to tackle is road network improvement,
>> initially
>> > in Metro Manila, and later (maybe soon?), expanding to other regions.
>> >
>> > Improvements that are intended to be addressed include the following:
>> > * Adding missing roads
>> > * Improving road attributes (names, lanes, restrictions, etc.)
>> > * Correcting road connectivity issues
>> > * Improving road classification consistency according to OSM guidelines
>> and
>> > local convention
>> > * Correcting road alignment issues
>> > * Other one-off fixes
>> >
>> > Of course, we intend to work closely with the community, and other
>> > stakeholders, especially at the local level.
>> >
>> > We also hope to organize, or lead, activities for developing technical
>> > skills, and enhancing collaboration, and community mapa-thons.  Think of
>> > this as an extension of my earlier MapAmore [1] initiatives.
>> >
>> > The tasking for Metro Manila [2] is now up, and is hosted by HOT Tasking
>> > Manager instance, and open to all interested contributors.
>> >
>> > In tomorrow's meet-up, I'll take the opportunity to elaborate on this
>> > initiative tomorrow. I'm looking forward to hear your feedback, and to
>> > answer any questions here, or directly by email.
>> >
>> > I also hope for your usual helpful collaboration, and support.
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> > Erwin
>> >
>> >
>> > [0]: http://kaartgroup.com/
>> > [1]: https://github.com/mapamore
>> > [2]: https://tasks.hotosm.org/project/3997
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > /Erwin Olario
>> >
>> > e: er...@ngnuity.xyz | v/m: https://t.me/GOwin | s:
>> https://mstdn.io/@GOwin
>> >
>> >
>> > 

Re: [talk-ph] OSM contributions - some basics for a newby

[Glen Scott]

Thanks Erwin, all noted.

I'm sure I'll have further questions on conventions or even basic editing
queries - is it best to ask here or via personal email, and if the latter,
who should I ask?

I've seen the PH conventions page, and finding it useful (e.g. tagging fish
farm pond "water") but one example where I'm not 100% clear would be the
pond dividers, where I see there are a few techniques in use, well at least
two (a) leaving some land between the ponds, and (b) making one large pond
and dividing it with lines tagged as embankments.  I see both in use; my
attempts so far have been to leave strips of land, though the embankment
line approach would be quicker.

Cheers

Glen



On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Erwin Olario <gov...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Glen. Thank you for your edits. We're happy to have you.
>
> Google's StreetView, unfortunately, shares a similar restriction to its
> Map service, and also not a valid source of information. I recently [0] had
> to redact data that was added from the map, that used this source for their
> edits.
>
> MapCentral, and any other copyright restricted sources, cannot also be
> used. Either you collection this information yourself (an excellent
> opportunity to stretch the legs, and get to know the neighborhood better),
> or convince the data owners to re-publish this data on OSM.
>
> In lieu of StreetView, you might like to try out Mapillary[1] or
> OpenStreetCam [2] to capture street-level imagery yourself.
>
> /Erwin
>
> [0]: https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/35
> [1]: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=map=15.91667=
> 120.3=10 <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapillary>
> [2]: http://openstreetcam.org/map/
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:42 AM Glen Scott <pave...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm making some contributions to NW Pangasinan (I'm from Australia, my
>> wife is from Alaminos) and would like to discuss some "rules" and seek some
>> advice...
>>
>> I think I may have already broken one rule re road tagging, but not using
>> the tag "service road" since that has a different use here.  But having
>> found the Philippines conventions page I promise to fix those indiscretions
>> in time...
>>
>> One question is around legitimate information sources - I understand
>> Google Maps can't be used - but can street view be used (great for seeing
>> the name of auditoriums etc.)?
>>
>> Can Mapcentral be used for Barangay names and borders or is there a
>> better source?  I see the Mapcentral borders differ considerably to the
>> Google Maps borders.
>>
>> I've sent one email to Alaminos City town hall re street names - no
>> response to date but will give them a call of I don't hear from them over
>> the next week.  Any other sources of street names?  Post office?  I'll be
>> there next March and can always ask people on the street, though some of
>> the streets in new sub-divisions don't appear to have houses yet
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Glen
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>>
> --
>
> /Erwin Olario
>
> e: er...@ngnuity.xyz | v/m: https://t.me/GOwin | s:
> https://mstdn.io/@GOwin
>
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[talk-ph] OSM contributions - some basics for a newby

[Glen Scott]

Hi,

I'm making some contributions to NW Pangasinan (I'm from Australia, my wife
is from Alaminos) and would like to discuss some "rules" and seek some
advice...

I think I may have already broken one rule re road tagging, but not using
the tag "service road" since that has a different use here.  But having
found the Philippines conventions page I promise to fix those indiscretions
in time...

One question is around legitimate information sources - I understand Google
Maps can't be used - but can street view be used (great for seeing the name
of auditoriums etc.)?

Can Mapcentral be used for Barangay names and borders or is there a better
source?  I see the Mapcentral borders differ considerably to the Google
Maps borders.

I've sent one email to Alaminos City town hall re street names - no
response to date but will give them a call of I don't hear from them over
the next week.  Any other sources of street names?  Post office?  I'll be
there next March and can always ask people on the street, though some of
the streets in new sub-divisions don't appear to have houses yet

Regards

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