Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Max Erickson]

There's lots of discussion of these points as a mapping resource.

The thing is, they don't need to exist as current OSM objects for
mappers to use them as a resource, there's lots of other ways to use
them as a reference. The deleted points can be extracted from the
mechanical edit changesets or processed out of a current GNIS dump or
whatever.


Max

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:27 PM Mateusz Konieczny
 wrote:
> Is there way to mark challenge as for armchair users/requiring local survey?
>
> And show from the second group only when explicitly required?
>
> I remember that on my attempt to use MapRoulette many were not doable without 
> local survey.

That's supposed to be what the selection, "too hard" is for - too hard
to do in MapRoulette.

The problem with that selection is that it appears to return the
object to the pool, and the users who chase numbers and standings view
that as a challenge. Selecting "too hard" appears to be a virtual
guarantee that someone else will map the object incorrectly. (I've
seen this happen, when I've selected "too hard" because I've known
from local knowledge that there was new construction and road
relocation that didn't show up in the aerials!)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 22, 2019, 3:22 PM by m...@rtijn.org:

>> On Mar 22, 2019, at 4:08 AM, Mark Wagner <>> mark+...@carnildo.com 
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
>> Martijn van Exel <>> m...@rtijn.org >> > wrote:
>>
 On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner < mark+...@carnildo.com 
  >
 wrote:

 On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
 Martijn van Exel < m...@rtijn.org   
 >>> m...@rtijn.org  >> wrote:

>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
>> <>> matkoni...@tutanota.com >> > 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
>> import that added them and delete objects that never had any
>> reason to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least
>> according to GNIS data.
>>
>> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will
>> not make the edit without a clear support so please comment if
>> you think that it is a good idea and if you think that it should
>> not be done.
>>
>
>
> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
> recently on Slack
> https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
> >  
>
> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
> review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
> exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
> human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve
> this using some human driven cleanup first.
>

 My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.

 There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
 unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
 left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
 mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
 trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
 of these was actually a school.

>>>
>>> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
>>> instructions?
>>>
>>
>> No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
>> merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
>> imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
>> just to delete all of them.
>>
>
> Short of messaging individual mappers, do you see a way in which MapRoulette 
> could be a ‘better citizen’?
> I’m thinking perhaps a way to ‘report’ challenges. (Not sure how that would 
> work though.)
>
Is there way to mark challenge as for armchair users/requiring local survey?

And show from the second group only when explicitly required?

I remember that on my attempt to use MapRoulette many were not doable without 
local survey.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 22, 2019, at 4:08 AM, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
> Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
>>> Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>>> 
> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
>  wrote:
> 
> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
> import that added them and delete objects that never had any
> reason to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least
> according to GNIS data.
> 
> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will
> not make the edit without a clear support so please comment if
> you think that it is a good idea and if you think that it should
> not be done. 
 
 
 Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
 recently on Slack
 https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
 
 My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
 review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
 exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
 human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve
 this using some human driven cleanup first.  
>>> 
>>> My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
>>> 
>>> There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
>>> unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
>>> left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
>>> mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
>>> trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
>>> of these was actually a school.
>>> 
>> 
>> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
>> instructions?
> 
> No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
> merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
> imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
> just to delete all of them.
> 

Short of messaging individual mappers, do you see a way in which MapRoulette 
could be a ‘better citizen’?
I’m thinking perhaps a way to ‘report’ challenges. (Not sure how that would 
work though.)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 22, 2019, 9:51 AM by rich...@systemed.net:

> The other automated edits you're proposing would be better done by adding
> the keys to editor blacklists because the tags aren't actually harming
> anyone. 
>
Main harm is that
- it is one more tag that people, especially newbies need to understand (
or be confused by it)
- its presence encourages adding more tags like this or adding
is_in:continent to additional objects

I agree that it is matter of opinion is this harm significant enough to justify
automated edit, but it certainly exists.

Anyway, based on earlier comment by Frederik Ramm I just created
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/17504 

"consider is_in:continent for automatic dropping or validator warning with 
autofix removal"

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mark Wagner]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> > On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
> > Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> >   
> >>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
> >>>  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
> >>> import that added them and delete objects that never had any
> >>> reason to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least
> >>> according to GNIS data.
> >>> 
> >>> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will
> >>> not make the edit without a clear support so please comment if
> >>> you think that it is a good idea and if you think that it should
> >>> not be done. 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
> >> recently on Slack
> >> https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
> >> 
> >> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
> >> review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
> >> exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
> >> human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve
> >> this using some human driven cleanup first.  
> > 
> > My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
> > 
> > There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
> > unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
> > left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
> > mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
> > trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
> > of these was actually a school.
> >   
> 
> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
> instructions?

No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
just to delete all of them.

-- 
Mark

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Richard Fairhurst]

Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will 
> not make the edit without a clear support so please comment if 
> you think that it is a good idea and if you think that it should 
> not be done. 

I think it's an excellent idea. I've deleted these nodes when I've
encountered them during general TIGER fixup but there are a lot, and often
in completely untenable locations.

The other automated edits you're proposing would be better done by adding
the keys to editor blacklists because the tags aren't actually harming
anyone. But the data in this case is actively misleading (it breaks, for
example, "nearest post office"-type searches) so should be deleted.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/USA-f5284732.html

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
> Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> 
>>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
>>> import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason
>>> to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to
>>> GNIS data.
>>> 
>>> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
>>> make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
>>> that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be
>>> done.   
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
>> recently on Slack
>> https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
>> 
>> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
>> review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
>> exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
>> human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve this
>> using some human driven cleanup first.
> 
> My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
> 
> There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
> unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them left
> around me, but the most common result was that an armchair mapper would
> drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building, trace the
> building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one of these was
> actually a school.
> 

Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better instructions?

Martijn

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mark Wagner]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> > On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
> > import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason
> > to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to
> > GNIS data.
> > 
> > Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
> > make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
> > that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be
> > done.   
> 
> 
> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
> recently on Slack
> https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
> 
> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
> review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
> exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
> human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve this
> using some human driven cleanup first.

My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.

There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them left
around me, but the most common result was that an armchair mapper would
drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building, trace the
building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one of these was
actually a school.

-- 
Mark

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 21, 2019, 6:18 PM by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:

> I, too, would appreciate seeing some sample data, let's say, some
> reasonable radius around 42.8257, -73.8790.  That's more to make sure
> that the technology is working right and not wetting on stuff that's
> already fixed, but of course, I'd check to verify my tentative
> conclusion that (historic) doesn't tag anything useful.
>

I uploaded files to https://github.com/matkoniecz/objects_for_deletion 
 and linked in

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_objects_that_are_not_existing_according_to_source_of_import_that_added_them#List_of_candidates

For now just file with all nodes in .osm file (can be opened with JOSM - File | 
Open menu).
As it is limited to nodes it works fairly well and can be browsed without 
performance issues.

I uploaded also file with objects very far away from 42, -73 deleted but it 
turned out to produce 
larger file, probably JOSM recorded deletions.

I can produce later something more user friendly if that would be useful and 
.osm files are too complicated
- let me know if that would be useful!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 21, 2019, 6:23 PM by cliff...@snowandsnow.us:

>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:52 AM Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com 
> > > wrote:
>
>> Good idea, independent check would be welcomed!
>>
>> Something from Seattle region would be OK, right?
>>
>> If my googling went right the you are probably interested
>> in data around
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Glassman/history#map=8/47.780/-122.388 
>> 
>>
>>
>
> Seattle area is fine or Skagit County to the north. Seattle would give me 
> more nodes to review which is good.
>
I uploaded files and linked in

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_objects_that_are_not_existing_according_to_source_of_import_that_added_them#List_of_candidates

For now just file with all nodes in .osm file (can be opened with JOSM). As it 
is limited to nodes
it works fairly well and ca be browsed without performance issues.

I uploaded also file with objects very far away from Seattle deleted but it 
turned out to produce larger file,
probably JOSM recorded deletions.

I can produce later something more user friendly if that would be useful and 
.osm files are too complicated
- let me know if that would be useful!
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Clifford Snow]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:52 AM Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> Good idea, independent check would be welcomed!
>
> Something from Seattle region would be OK, right?
>
> If my googling went right the you are probably interested
> in data around
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Glassman/history#map=8/47.780/-122.388
>
>
Seattle area is fine or Skagit County to the north. Seattle would give me
more nodes to review which is good.

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] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Kevin Kenny]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:31 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> The benefit is that it gives mappers a reason to examine places - not just 
> the disappeared feature itself but also the area around it - that would 
> otherwise go unexamined. Since we have so much unexamined space in the U.S., 
> any opportunity to spark mappers’ curiosity about some of that space, is a 
> welcome trigger.

I need no incentive like that, and no mapper that I've corresponded
with does.  I'm still in the middle of an area where TIGER mapping is
absolutely atrocious, and I've cleaned only small corners. I've found
that it's the best use of my very limited time to confine my edits to
places that I've visited or intend to visit, which is why you'll see
most of my mapping taking place in my own neighbourhood, in the
vicinity of hiking trails, on the roads that I've travelled to get to
the trails, and the imports that I curate with respect to the
boundaries of public lands.

I've edited and conflated a bunch of GNIS points. I have yet to see
one marked as (historic) that was of the least bit of use. For the
best of them, they designate a building that is still standing but has
been repurposed. If I'm mapping buildings, I'll get around to that one
in any case. If I'm not micromapping to the level of individual
buildings, the information that "the private house here used to be a
two-room schoolhouse," is simply a distraction. Even if I am mapping
buildings, often the remodelling is so extensive that I can't spot any
indicia that it was once a schoolhouse, and can't even state with
confidence that the building wasn't demolished with a new building
constructed on the site. For the limited sample of (historic) GNIS
points that I've encountered, there is simply zero value to OSM
(beyond possibly the spot elevation, which is also often of
questionable quality.)

I can't speak to OHM. I've never contributed to that project. I
propose to let those who do contribute to it manage their own data
imports, and judge the value of (historic) GNIS data only with respect
to OSM, the project at hand.

> It may feel like a time sink for some, but my hope is that others will feel 
> it’s an interesting exercise to improve the map.

I understand in principle - but I don't see bad GNIS data as being any
greater incentive than bad TIGER data - and the anti-import crowd hold
the failure of the bad TIGER data to recruit mappers to fix it as a
model for why imports in general have a negative impact on the
community. Moreover, I've tried MapRoulette a few times, and every
time, come away with a mix of, "I don't have enough local knowledge to
do a good job here," and "I can make better progress cleaning other
things up closer to home." Most of the things it gives me, I wind up
clicking "too hard," while possibly tidying something else.

> Stepping back a bit, the urge to fix previous automated edits with new 
> automated fixes is understandable, but it may lead to a more casual approach 
> to imports and automated edits, because we basically say with each fix that 
> ill-informed automated map edits can always be fixed with more automated 
> edits later. We’ve already gone down that path in the U.S. quite far, so we 
> should proceed with extra care - unless we as a community decide that that is 
> the nature of OSM in this country. It isn’t to me.

Merciful heavens, no! Still, the fact remains that we have a bunch of
botched imports from the early days of mapping in the US. No,
'botched' is too strong a term. They were done well according to the
practice of the time. They significantly advanced the usefulness of
the map when they happened. Still, in light of what we've learned
since that time, they fall catastophically short of the data quality
that we now expect of an import. Few, if any, of us argue in favour of
importing at even close to that level of carelessness. Are you really
arguing that making it as laborious as possible to repair _known_ bad
data in these early imports is desirable, in order to discourage
future reckless imports?  That doesn't strike me as the way to make
forward progress.

For what it's worth I speak as someone who's, on a much smaller scale,
taken on the repair of an early import that was of unacceptably loiw
quality by today's standards. Check out
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ke9tv-nysdec-lands/history for how
much work *that* was. Without developing significant automation (a
script that worked off PostGIS queries and connected to the JOSM API
to set everything up for manual conflation), I'd not have been able to
complete the task. I won't say that the results are perfect - nothing
ever is - but it's a whale of a lot better than what was there before,
and I use the result with confidence for guidance in the field. (And
yes, the project was discussed on talk-us and imports, and wikified at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NYS_DEC_Lands - so I offer at
least the semblance of due diligence.).

So - don't tolerate 

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Good idea, independent check would be welcomed!

Something from Seattle region would be OK, right?

If my googling went right the you are probably interested
in data around
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Glassman/history#map=8/47.780/-122.388

Mar 21, 2019, 5:43 PM by cliff...@snowandsnow.us:

> I'm in favor of the bot but I'd like to review a sample of the data being 
> removed in my area. The purpose is to test the assumption that the data is of 
> no use.
>
> Best,
> Clifford
>

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Clifford Snow]

I'm in favor of the bot but I'd like to review a sample of the data being
removed in my area. The purpose is to test the assumption that the data is
of no use.

Best,
Clifford

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:32 AM Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> Mar 21, 2019, 3:56 PM by m...@rtijn.org:
>
> Re-reading this I phrased this with more hyperbole than I intended, sorry.
>
> I see no problem here, after all lack of control over automated edit is
> how we ended
> in this situation.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 21, 2019, 3:56 PM by m...@rtijn.org:

> Re-reading this I phrased this with more hyperbole than I intended, sorry.
>
I see no problem here, after all lack of control over automated edit is how we 
ended 
in this situation.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 21, 2019, 3:29 PM by m...@rtijn.org:

> The benefit is that it gives mappers a reason to examine places - not just 
> the disappeared feature itself but also the area around it - that would 
> otherwise go unexamined. Since we have so much unexamined space in the U.S., 
> any opportunity to spark mappers’ curiosity about some of that space, is a 
> welcome trigger. 
>
> It may feel like a time sink for some, but my hope is that others will feel 
> it’s an interesting exercise to improve the map. 
>
I think that existing issues detected by say Osmose are more than enough to 
encourage fixing stuff.

http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/  
has massive amount of things to fix, even in well 
mapped areas.

Willing mappers are bottleneck, so whenever rare of bot-fixable
problems happens I think that it is a good idea to use it and spend human 
mapping time
on something more useful.

And if there is any danger of any area in USA running out of Maproulette or 
Osmose tasks - 
let me know and I will create something.

Especially Wikipedia-related one, as side effect of my project of finding 
tourism attractions
based on OSM data I created validator detecting various issues with wikipedia 
and wikidata tasks,
if anyone is interested I may run it for some part of USA.

> Stepping back a bit, the urge to fix previous automated edits with new 
> automated fixes is understandable, but it may lead to a more casual approach 
> to imports and automated edits, because we basically say with each fix that 
> ill-informed automated map edits can always be fixed with more automated 
> edits later. We’ve already gone down that path in the U.S. quite far, so we 
> should proceed with extra care - unless we as a community decide that that is 
> the nature of OSM in this country. It isn’t to me.
>
I fully support proper discussion before doing automatic changes, especially on 
larger scale and
ones that will delete items making them harder to reverse.

And I would be really irritated if someone would use this automatic edit 
proposal to 
support "my edit requires no discussion, after all sooner or later someone will 
fix my mess".

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

Re-reading this I phrased this with more hyperbole than I intended, sorry.

I do think we should learn from past mistakes and approach any automated edit, 
be it an import or a (subsequent) fix, with the proper diligence. Which is what 
we’re doing here, and I commend you for taking an open-minded approach in your 
initial email.

Martijn

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 8:29 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Stepping back a bit, the urge to fix previous automated edits with new 
> automated fixes is understandable, but it may lead to a more casual approach 
> to imports and automated edits, because we basically say with each fix that 
> ill-informed automated map edits can always be fixed with more automated 
> edits later. We’ve already gone down that path in the U.S. quite far, so we 
> should proceed with extra care - unless we as a community decide that that is 
> the nature of OSM in this country. It isn’t to me.
> 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Harald Kliems]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:31 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> The benefit is that it gives mappers a reason to examine places - not just
> the disappeared feature itself but also the area around it - that would
> otherwise go unexamined. Since we have so much unexamined space in the
> U.S., any opportunity to spark mappers’ curiosity about some of that space,
> is a welcome trigger.
>

I have certainly have had that experience when participating in various
MapRoulette challenges: You come for the non-existent landing strip; you
stay for half an hour to clean up the messy TIGER roads. However, given
that there are so many other MapRoulette tasks that will lead you to remote
areas and _can't_ be automated, I'm fully in support of Mateusz's automatic
edit.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[EthnicFood IsGreat]

Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:04:13 +0100 (CET)
From: Mateusz Konieczny 
Cc: Talk Us 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that
are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them



Mar 21, 2019, 4:46 AM by m...@rtijn.org:




On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny <>> matkoni...@tutanota.com 
>> > wrote:

I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.

Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done.>>


Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly recently on Slack > 
https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
>

My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers review these 
locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes exist mostly in 
‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some human mapper attention. So I’d 
be in favor of trying to resolve this using some human driven cleanup first.


What is the benefit, during survey, of mapped places that are not existing 
anymore?

I encounter many during surveys (usually result of data getting outdated) and 
for me it was
always time sink (as I needed to check is it actually gone) and never useful in 
any way.

Note that it is not obvious, especially for beginner or data users, that all of 
this places
are not existing anymore.



Instead of deleting the features that don't exist anymore, couldn't they 
be moved over to OHM?


Mark



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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mike N]

On 3/21/2019 3:04 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
What is the benefit, during survey, of mapped places that are not 
existing anymore?


I encounter many during surveys (usually result of data getting 
outdated) and for me it was
always time sink (as I needed to check is it actually gone) and never 
useful in any way.


Note that it is not obvious, especially for beginner or data users, that 
all of this places

are not existing anymore.


 This has been my experience as well when methodically reviewing 
several hundred GNIS nodes around here.   Everyone is fond of pointing 
out where GNIS is poorly located or out of date, but every GNIS object 
identified as (historical) was 100% accurate.   Let's reserve mapper 
labor and MapRoulette projects for those that benefit from human review. 
 This project would qualify for automated intervention.


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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 21, 2019, 4:46 AM by m...@rtijn.org:

>
>
>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny <>> matkoni...@tutanota.com 
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
>> import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
>> appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.
>>
>> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
>> make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
>> that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done.>>  
>>
>
> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly recently on 
> Slack > https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
> >  
>
> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers review 
> these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes exist mostly in 
> ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some human mapper attention. So 
> I’d be in favor of trying to resolve this using some human driven cleanup 
> first.
>
What is the benefit, during survey, of mapped places that are not existing 
anymore?

I encounter many during surveys (usually result of data getting outdated) and 
for me it was
always time sink (as I needed to check is it actually gone) and never useful in 
any way.

Note that it is not obvious, especially for beginner or data users, that all of 
this places
are not existing anymore.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny  
> wrote:
> 
> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
> import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
> appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.
> 
> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
> make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
> that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done. 


Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly recently on 
Slack https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 

My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers review these 
locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes exist mostly in 
‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some human mapper attention. So I’d 
be in favor of trying to resolve this using some human driven cleanup first.

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

[Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

There are thousands of objects mistakenly imported to OSM from GNIS.
Objects proposed to be deleted were documented in GNIS database as not
existing at time of the import, but were imported anyway.

Edit would remove many nonexisting objects that are currently
misleading users of OSM data and confuse mappers. There are many
amenity=post_office, amenity=place_of_worship and other mapped in USA
that in reality are not existing. There are also thousands of object
retagged to hide them in standard rendering but this entries also
should be deleted as unwanted and usually incorrect (for example
abandoned:amenity=post_office).  

Some of them are present for a decade or more like for example
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/357118918/history

Examples of other objects that would be deleted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/358721524#map=16/33.1701/-83.2385
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/359023261
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/359290731/#map=15/41.6947/-72.6189


I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.

Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done. 

Plan is as follows:

I will take full responsibility for all edits and if anything goes
wrong I will fix it.

To avoid deleting objects that were not imported from GNIS following
filters will apply
* Only objects created in specific changesets that were importing GNIS
* Only objects with name tag that has "(historical)" part (this is how
GNIS indicates nonexisting objects, see documentation page for details)
* Only objects with gnis:feature_id and name tags that were not changed
from import to 2019-03-10
* Only objects that have gnis:feature_id and name tags, where name tag
has "(historical)" part at time of edit
* Nodes that are now parts of ways or relations will be skipped, ways
and relations (if any, it seems that only nodes were imported) that are
now parts of relations will be skipped

All must apply, otherwise item will not be deleted.

List of changesets that added objects that I want to delete (most of
objects added in GNIS import will not be deleted):

* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/747176 (includes notification
  of author of edits)
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/748530
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/749606
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/751242
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/755766
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/756644
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/758594
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/763672
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/764755
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/766700
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/767554
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/770127
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/774950
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/777367
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/780743
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/781903
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/783501
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/784670
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/786350
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/794649

Each changeset created by a bot will contain a single element or group
of close elements to avoid edits spanning across large areas (it is
impossible in cases where edited object itself spans very large area).

Documentation page with full info on OSM Wiki is at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_objects_that_are_not_existing_according_to_source_of_import_that_added_them

This message will be crossposted to OSM USA slack channel 

I have experience with automatic edits. This edit will be done
carefully to avoid damage to OSM data.

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