] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v.
water
> walker.t.brad...@gmail.com hat am 24.11.2020 12:19 geschrieben:
>
> Is there a wiki page with a "wish-list" of things, with approximate costs
> where developers could post? There is likely a disconnect between t
> walker.t.brad...@gmail.com hat am 24.11.2020 12:19 geschrieben:
>
> Is there a wiki page with a "wish-list" of things, with approximate costs
> where developers could post? There is likely a disconnect between those
> willing to pay, and those who could actually scrounge up the money.
Nov 24, 2020, 15:09 by walker.t.brad...@gmail.com:
>
> I’ve seen the micro grants, I’m not talking about funding from OSM
> Foundation. Basically if someone could identify a solution to some of the
> problems that come up in this tagging thread like “updating how X rendering
> process
From: Christoph Hormann mailto:o...@imagico.de> >
Sent: Tuesday, 24 November, 2020 11:11
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org> >
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v.
water
Dave F via Tagging
> Sent: Tuesday, 24 November, 2020 11:11
> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v.
> water
>
>
>
>> Dave F via Tagging hat am 24.11.2020 01:24
>> geschrieben:
>>
>>
Nov 24, 2020, 01:24 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
>
>
> On 22/11/2020 22:27, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>> Exactly. It also shows how we in OSM traditionally make decisions about
>> tagging. An idea to change tagging practice was suggested - on an open
>> channel for everyone to read and
tually scrounge up the money. Thus, once consensus
on what changes are needed has been achieved, we can scrounge for money?
Walker KB
-Original Message-
From: Christoph Hormann
Sent: Tuesday, 24 November, 2020 11:11
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Ex
> Dave F via Tagging hat am 24.11.2020 01:24
> geschrieben:
>
> Yes, but the demand was still made &
So what? Someone (an individual, not 'OSM-Carto' as a whole) made a suggestion
(and not a demand) that turned out to not be such a good idea and therefore did
not achieve consensus.
>
On 22/11/2020 22:27, Christoph Hormann wrote:
Exactly. It also shows how we in OSM traditionally make decisions
about tagging. An idea to change tagging practice was suggested - on
an open channel for everyone to read and comment on without hurdles
and with an archive that allows us now to
On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 8:04 PM Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> Therefore, a holistic solution is needed for large objects. Setting an
> api limit is good because it gives consumers a guarantee about the
> worst-case object they might have to handle. However, it must also be
> combined with a
Brian, as someone who worked on these national rail relations (and still does,
to some extent, though only around the edges), I agree with you that "very
large" relations (in Amtrak we say that one route is >2500 relations and meets
that standard of "very large") do exist. And, they are
As time goes on, we will encounter increasingly accurate and resolute
mechanisms for surveying things like coastlines and land cover. For
example, there are discussions about whether to use things like AI and
machine learning to produce such data. The demand for ways to deal with
larger objects
> Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging hat am 22.11.2020
> 20:49 geschrieben:
>
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-March/035347.html
> Yes, long time ago there was a problematic idea that was abandoned.
Exactly. It also shows how we in OSM traditionally make decisions about
Nov 22, 2020, 19:00 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> I'm surprised you think that as you were a contributor to the discussions:
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3102
>
This is a closed, not implemented PR. So it is not a case of
"OSM-carto demanding boundaries on
Nov 22, 2020, 19:34 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
>
>
> On 22/11/2020 18:12, Clay Smalley wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging <>>
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Contributing to the database (also *volunteers*) are
Excuse me, what is the limitation here against tagging "Extremely long
Amtrak relations"? Some of those Amtrak services, while long, in my
knowledge are still far from the longest in the OSM database, like they're
shorter than the train route between Moscow to Pyongyang, which have been
tagged as
Am 22.11.2020 um 17:35 schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano:
..
I like the idea of an api limit, though we would need a strategy to
deal with existing large objects.
..
This is, "surprise", not a new topic. There are certain issues with the
semantics of relations which make this slightly more
On 22/11/2020 18:12, Clay Smalley wrote:
On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging
mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
Contributing to the database (also *volunteers*) are expected to
map to a certain standard. There shouldn't be a reason to expect
develops not
On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> On 22/11/2020 11:24, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
>
> I sincerely hope "I'm in favor of fixing" translates as "I'm planning to
> fix", though I fear I may be disappointed.
>
> More broadly, we need to nip this
I'm surprised you think that as you were a contributor to the discussions:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3102
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-March/035347.html
DaveF
On 22/11/2020 16:32, Christoph Hormann wrote:
Dave F via Tagging hat am
Nov 22, 2020, 17:08 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> Likewise we need to stop software developers from expectingcontributors
> to add data purely because they can't be bothered/notcompetent enough to
> write a few lines of code. (OSM-carto demandingboundaries on ways)
>
[citation
I agree. I removed such duplicate tagging from my area some time ago, and
it has not affected anything.
I even went so far as to draft a proposal to change that recommendation.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:ZeLonewolf/proposals/Boundary_relation_way_members
On Sun, Nov 22, 2020,
Super relations could also solve problems like the Tongass National
Forest. By crafting a relation of relations, you still preserve the
ability to have one tagged super-object represent one complex thing in real
life, but with natural cut points so that any consumer can choose to deal
with in in
> Dave F via Tagging hat am 22.11.2020 17:08
> geschrieben:
>
> [...] OSM-carto demanding boundaries on ways
???
I am smelling fake news here.
--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
I recently found out about the Extremely long Amtrak route relations from
clay_c.
Your message is a bit confusing at first but I think you are proposing that
relations and super-relations should be used more-often to reduce the
complexity of processing data for data consumers?
In that case, I
On 22/11/2020 11:24, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
[cross-posted to talk-us@ and tagging@, please choose your follow-ups
wisely]
If you go against the accepted principle of not X-posting on a
newsgroup, you've no entitlement to lecture how others respond.
Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
> It seems
[cross-posted to talk-us@ and tagging@, please choose your follow-ups wisely]
Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
> It seems that we are increasingly doing things to simplify the
> model because certain tooling can't handle the real level of
> complexity that exists in the real world. I'm in favor of
27 matches
Mail list logo
