Re: [Talk-us] Low-quality NHD imports

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 8:56 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
>
>>
> Unnamed streams are helpful to people hiking in the forest areas by giving
> a landmark for navigation. From areas I'm familiar with, there are
> thousands of unnamed streams. They are unnamed because civilization just
> hasn't reached it. For example, we have Logan Creek nearby. If it was in a
> national forest it would most likely be unnamed.
>
Agree, and they may provide a source of drinking water (with treatment)
when backpacking or on extended hikes in the back country. Please do not
remove!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Low-quality NHD imports

[Clifford Snow]

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Wolfgang Zenker 
wrote:

>
> the problem here is that at least those NHD imports I have seen in
> Montana have only some of the existing streams. I don't know if this is
> because NHD does not have more or because the import used not all
> available streams. "Existing streams" here means both streams seen on
> USGS Topo maps and stream beds seen on imagery.
>
>
Wolfgang,
Not sure how the NHD data for Montana got into OSM. In my own county in
Washington, it's far from complete, at least compared to NHD data. I've
been slowly adding them by tracing in streams from current, and much better
resolution NHD data and aerial imagery. My county is relatively small,
especially to Montana. It usually takes me two or three days to drive from
west to east. I can be out of my county in 3 hours. Of course in Montana,
it's mostly the foothills and mountain ranges that have the bulk of the
steams to edit.

Maybe we can get someone to host NHD data for others to trace in. If anyone
is reading this and is willing to host the data, I'm willing to help with
the design and conversions.

BTW - I lived in Montana for a number of years and will be back there after
the State of the Map US conference to do some hiking and sightseeing. I
remember fishing in the Bitterroot. Nothing like fresh caught trout. It's
one of the nicest states to visit. (Winters can be miserable.)

Clifford
-- 
@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

Re: [Talk-us] Low-quality NHD imports

[Wolfgang Zenker]

Hi,

* Charlotte Wolter  [171016 23:50]:
>  Clifford makes some very good points. In the West, particularly,
> those little intermittent streams are important landmarks. Particularly
> when hiking in a featureless area, such as pinyon-juniper forest, a
> trail direction may say something like, "turn right after crossing the third
> drainage."
> [..]

the problem here is that at least those NHD imports I have seen in
Montana have only some of the existing streams. I don't know if this is
because NHD does not have more or because the import used not all
available streams. "Existing streams" here means both streams seen on
USGS Topo maps and stream beds seen on imagery.

Wolfgang

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

Re: [Talk-us] Low-quality NHD imports

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

Echoing (+1-ing) what Charlotte (and Clifford) said:  waterway=creek on a 
downward-flowing way (and an intermittent=yes tag, if true) are extensively 
used and helpful, certainly where I am.  While hiking, they are relatively 
unambiguous wayfinding attributes, especially when/as they are 
numbered/sequenced in an order and/or you are keeping count of them between 
here and there.  This is a simple method to aid navigation:   name= tags of 
"Creek 1" through "Creek 9" (up to n, depending) along a directed path 
(intersection of path and creek) does not seem a terrible faux pas to me.  Of 
course, if the creeks are truly named, use those values in name= tags instead.

I repeat an important aspect of "stream tagging:"  please assure the way's 
direction "points downstream."  It truly helps to get this correct!  Also, 
where a confluence occurs (two waterway ways join), assure the ways connect 
with a node, this makes a more correct waterway network.

I welcome any or all of these as MapRoulette waterway improvement challenges!

SteveA
California

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

Re: [Talk-us] Low-quality NHD imports

[Charlotte Wolter]

Hello, all,

Clifford makes some very good points. In the West, particularly,
those little intermittent streams are important landmarks. Particularly
when hiking in a featureless area, such as pinyon-juniper forest, a
trail direction may say something like, "turn right after crossing the third
drainage."
And, during the summer monsoon, you want to know where they
are because they might flash flood.
The arid West has many intermittent drainages. Whatever they
are named (arroyo, stream, creek, etc.), it is important to include them.

Charlotte


At 07:56 PM 10/13/2017, you wrote:




On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Christoph Hormann 
<o...@imagico.de> wrote:

On Friday 13 October 2017, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> I remain unconvinced that importing or not importing has had any
> significant impact on whether people improve the map manually.


There are a number of possible measures that could be considered for
improving old NHD imports:

* removal of unnecessary tags to reduce the baggage mappers would have
to deal with when working on the data.
* removal of small unnamed streams which are not necessary for the
overall river network connectivity in areas where the geometric
accuracy is poor by current standards (and it is therefore usually
easier for mappers to newly trace those streams instead of trying to
improve the inaccurate data)



Unnamed streams are helpful to people hiking in the forest areas by 
giving a landmark for navigation. From areas I'm familiar with, 
there are thousands of unnamed streams. They are unnamed because 
civilization just hasn't reached it. For example, we have Logan 
Creek nearby. If it was in a national forest it would most likely be unnamed.



* creating maproulette challenges for fixing inaccurate waterway
classifications - in particular waterways tagged 'waterway=stream' but
with a name containing 'Creek' or 'River' will often qualify as
waterway=river. Same for artificial waterways with 'waterway=ditch'
but names containing 'Canal' or ther other way round.


When I see creek in the name, it implies stream, at least in areas 
I'm familiar with, then again that's where I usually map. I'm not 
sure where you are from but I never consider telling you how to 
classify something just by the name. Maproulette could be handy if 
we had NHD classification differences between what's tagged in OSM and NHD.


* creating maproulette challenges for unconnected waterways.


+1

* adding missing 'intermittent=yes' to waterways in imports where this
was not properly set based on the feature codes.


+1


--
@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


Charlotte Wolter
927 18th Street Suite A
Santa Monica, California
90403
+1-310-597-4040
Mobile: 310-663-3699
techl...@techlady.com
Skype: thetechlady

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

Re: [Talk-us] Something very bad happening in Maryland?

[Max Erickson]

More at:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2017-October/005181.html

At the moment they are blocked:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1587

It can be hard to say if the node only changesets are broken. JOSM
will split changes up like that when they exceed the API limit (10,000
objects) and the ways will appear in a later changeset.

Of course they are bad style whether they are broken or not, the
import should be split into smaller more manageable pieces.


Max

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

[Talk-us] Something very bad happening in Maryland?

[Ben Discoe]

If you look across a large area of the Maryland, for example around here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/39.11882/-76.62031

You may notice a few very odd things.

1. Back in 2015, user 'gdoyle' created a large number of buildings,
using small, incorrect geometry.

2. This week, user 'annapolissailor' has been doing a massive building
import in the same area.  This time the geometry is detailed, however:

  A. The changesets (such as
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52962696#map=14/39.1152/-76.6224)
say the source is "Bing", when they are clearly not Bing.  Presumably
they are some official GIS building footprints, but of unknown origin.

  B. The changeset comment says "Huge number of validation fixes and
merges", when the actual change is adding thousands of nodes (not
fixes, not merges, not validation)

  C. Thousands of these buildings are being uploaded incorrectly with
ONLY their nodes, not ways.

I left a comment on one of the changesets asking 'annapolissailor'
what they are doing, but maybe somebody here already knows?

Thanks,
Ben

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