On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
What do you propose to do with source tags found on an object when you
modify this object based on a different source?
Speaking for myself, I either replace it (if I'm replacing virtually
all the geometry) or
On 18/05/2013 16:56, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Point is it doesn't really belong in the data, because it is metadata.
This is a false argument. There's nothing wrong with metadata in the
database if it's *useful*.
When I go for a walk I survey. I use a gps. When mapping the data I use
2013/5/21 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com
On 18/05/2013 16:56, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Point is it doesn't really belong in the data, because it is metadata.
This is a false argument. There's nothing wrong with metadata in the
database if it's *useful*.
When I go for a walk I survey. I
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
But in the end I think this whole source thing is completely
overestimated.
Yup.
What do you propose to do with source tags found on an object when
you modify this object based on a different source?
OSM has full object history. :)
cheers
Richard
--
View
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
But in the end I think this whole source thing is completely
overestimated. In the end the following mappers will compare what is on the
map with what they know or believe to be there in reality, and in case
Hi,
maybe a little bit. For remote-mappers it's a good hint, if objects
doesn't fit to imagery.
Henning
Am 21.05.2013 13:26, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
But in the end I think this whole source thing is completely
overestimated.
___
talk
Am 21.05.2013 13:30, schrieb Richard Fairhurst:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
What do you propose to do with source tags found on an object when
you modify this object based on a different source?
OSM has full object history. :)
...which is an argument that the source may fit well on the
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/Imagery_and_data_sources#Google_Imagery
This is one explanation. Also source=Google really says nothing that source
is Google Maps.
P.
2013/5/18 malenki o...@malenki.ch
There are abot 33.000 objects in OSM which have google in the one
way
2013/5/18 malenki o...@malenki.ch
Any thoughts about that?
don't put source tags on objects but on the changeset?
If you are interested what the intended meaning is, you should ask the
contributors who added this, I guess different mappers used this for
different things, google is quite
On 18/05/13 13:31, malenki wrote:
There are abot 33.000 objects in OSM which have google in the one
way or another in their source tag:
http://malenki.ch/d/2013-05-18_142122_scr_source_google.png
Just type google in the value-field:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source#values
Any
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2013/5/18 malenki o...@malenki.ch
Any thoughts about that?
don't put source tags on objects but on the changeset?
I see no difference in using source= on objects or changesets except
the visibility for the source
___
pec...@gmail.com wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/Imagery_and_data_sources#Google_Imagery
This is one explanation.
As it seems for the value parts with the matching dates on them.
Also source=Google really says nothing that source is Google Maps.
hopefully
On 18/05/2013 13:31, malenki wrote:
There are abot 33.000 objects in OSM which have google in the one
way or another in their source tag:
http://malenki.ch/d/2013-05-18_142122_scr_source_google.png
Just type google in the value-field:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source#values
Any
Dave F. wrote:
I use Google daily to map in OSM. I search their database for names
websites of schools, restaurants etc. Nothing wrong in that. I don't
tag the source as google, but others might.
Since Google links to websites of the schools, restaurants etc I'd
consider it wrong to say google
On 05/18/2013 03:55 PM, malenki wrote:
Dave F. wrote:
IMO Source should be on the object, not on the changeset.
+1 (except if there is one changeset for one object (; )
This is not my opinion. Let's take a simple example: a school.
Some first user maps it from imagery, and so just draws
Yohan Boniface wrote:
On 05/18/2013 03:55 PM, malenki wrote:
Dave F. wrote:
IMO Source should be on the object, not on the changeset.
+1 (except if there is one changeset for one object (; )
This is not my opinion. Let's take a simple example: a school.
Some first user maps it from imagery,
2013/5/18 malenki o...@malenki.ch
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2013/5/18 malenki o...@malenki.ch
Any thoughts about that?
don't put source tags on objects but on the changeset?
I see no difference in using source= on objects or changesets except
the visibility for the source
Point
Anybody else who noticed we already had this discussion last year ;)
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-November/065034.html
On 05/18/2013 02:31 PM, malenki wrote:
There are abot 33.000 objects in OSM which have google in the one
way or another in their source tag:
On Saturday 18 May 2013, Yohan Boniface wrote:
On 05/18/2013 03:55 PM, malenki wrote:
Dave F. wrote:
IMO Source should be on the object, not on the changeset.
+1 (except if there is one changeset for one object (; )
This is not my opinion. Let's take a simple example: a school.
[...]
I will point out here that iD has invented a new changeset tag which I find
useful. It automatically records what imagery layers you use while editing
and throws them into an imagery_used=* tag. This removes the need for users
to manually tag source information if they are just tracing imagery. I
2013/5/18 Christoph Hormann chris_horm...@gmx.de
- imagine mapping something based on satellite images and you
need to use different images for various parts due to clouds or even
the common case of supplementing survey data with Bing images.
yes, this is very common, at least in regions
On Saturday 18 May 2013, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
[...] Usually with aerial
imagery from webmaps you also don't see from when they are, at least
almost nobody stores this information in the source tag, but it is
much more relevant (IMHO) to know traced from aerial imagery from
2007 than
22 matches
Mail list logo
