Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
Michał Borsuk schrieb: Without getting too much into the linguistic issues, I'd support the Swedish railway=historic_path for anything further than stillgelegt (English abandoned?), that is either with track, or without, but not yet turned into a bike path (or anything similar). But let's wait for others to comment. It seems, that no one else will comment here? I'm still not satisfied to use something with time in it like historic as part of a list with timeless words describing states. levelled or disappeared might be better suitable to this list: - proposed/planned - construction - () - disused - abandonded(/dismantled) - levelled/disappeared 25/37 ways worldwide using other words are retagged quickly ... Mueck ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
On 31 July 2010 10:06, Heiko Jacobs heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote: Michał Borsuk schrieb: Without getting too much into the linguistic issues, I'd support the Swedish railway=historic_path for anything further than stillgelegt (English abandoned?), that is either with track, or without, but not yet turned into a bike path (or anything similar). But let's wait for others to comment. It seems, that no one else will comment here? I'm still not satisfied to use something with time in it like historic as part of a list with timeless words describing states. levelled or disappeared might be better suitable to this list: - proposed/planned - construction - () - disused - abandonded(/dismantled) - levelled/disappeared I agree with your arguments. Then former? Disappeared cannot be used, because it implies that the railway just rolled itself and went home for Feierabend. Or a UFO took it one night. I don't like levelled for another reason: it is a word that is not easily understood for those English-challenged, that is beginners. It's not a word that easily translates into other languages. For this I would propose removed. (Then it does not contrast with dismantled very much, but frankly I am getting lost in those distinctions). - proposed/planned - construction - () - disused - abandonded - removed/dismantled/former (if there really is a difference) - [*=bike path] -- Best regards, mit freundlichen Grüssen, meilleurs sentiments, Pozdrowienia, Michał Borsuk ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Proposed additional tags for bus stops and an import of San Fracisco data
I would love to see GTFS data imported into OSM, especially the SF data if you can convince them to change the license. I think the street= tag is a good idea. I'm unsure of the bearing tag. If we know which street the stop is on and where the stop is the direction the bus is going follows from that. Could you provide an example of where and how that would come in useful? Or is it something that we need to know only if the imported location of the stop is not precise enough to show which side of the street it is on? How are you planning to deal with existing data? Many stops are already mapped and have more data than is in the GTFS feed. For example, does the stop have a shelter, or a ticker to show when the next bus is coming or a bench, etc. Cheers, Greg ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
On 31 July 2010 14:19, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote: On Saturday 31 July 2010 10:06:23 Heiko Jacobs wrote: It seems, that no one else will comment here? I think you don't get much comment because most mappers are too busy with mapping stuff that is still there. If we don't have some order in it now, we can run into problems later. Inconsistencies do exist already. There is actually a significant number of people that think we should _not_ map stuff that is no longer there. But IIRC the question was how to map a former railway line that is older/more damaged than mothballed / overgrown with trees, but not yet removed. That could be mapped. -- Best regards, mit freundlichen Grüssen, meilleurs sentiments, Pozdrowienia, Michał Borsuk ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
Michał Borsuk schrieb: I agree with your arguments. Then former? former is a little bit non-specific. A disused or abandoned railway may also be called former Disappeared cannot be used, because it implies that the railway just rolled itself and went home for Feierabend. Or a UFO took it one night. For real railway fans only an UFO can explain why someone can have the absurd idea to remove any rail ;-) In times when discarded metall ist valuable enough also other explainations will exists ... I don't like levelled for another reason: it is a word that is not easily understood for those English-challenged, that is beginners. It's not a word that easily translates into other languages. For this I would propose removed. (Then it does not contrast with dismantled very much, but frankly I am getting lost in those distinctions). Better than levelled might be the words converted or transformed? converted/transformed to farmland/residential areas/village green/... including filling of cuttings and removing embankments ... removed might also be ok if it is clear enough, that the whole way incl. cutt./emb. is removed, not only the rails? - proposed/planned - construction - () - disused - abandonded - removed/dismantled/former (if there really is a difference) dismantled is seldomely in use an I think similar to abandoned - [*=bike path] If I found a cycleway as former railway I just gave both tags: cycleway and abandoned railway. Might be I change them to the new word ... If the cycleway uses the old railway gravel under the waterbound macadam a little bit of railway still exists ;-) Mueck ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
On 31 July 2010 15:13, Heiko Jacobs heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote: Michał Borsuk schrieb: I agree with your arguments. Then former? former is a little bit non-specific. A disused or abandoned railway may also be called former It's already called disused or abandoned. I don't like levelled for another reason: it is a word that is not easily understood for those English-challenged, that is beginners. It's not a word that easily translates into other languages. For this I would propose removed. (Then it does not contrast with dismantled very much, but frankly I am getting lost in those distinctions). Better than levelled might be the words converted or transformed? converted/transformed to farmland/residential areas/village green/... including filling of cuttings and removing embankments ... If any traces of it are removed, then it doesn't classify for OSM. -- Best regards, mit freundlichen Grüssen, meilleurs sentiments, Pozdrowienia, Michał Borsuk ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
Cartinus schrieb: I'm interested in railways too, so I find that interesting. Railways are relative sparse, so it won't clutter the map much. ... and with the suitable tag it won't clutter the rendered slippy map I don't like gaps. ;-) A former railway between Ittersbach and Pforzheim I could map 90% because there are enough traces (gravel, embankments, cuttings, bridges, ...) but 10% are levveled for farmland or residential ares including buildings. But the way can be reconstrcuted (straight on or with known curvature) There for I need tags. Also for other ways, where parts of it have coordinates because of streets parallel to the old rail or directly on the old railway, other parts still have real traces and other parts were easily reconstructable from old maps. So a combination of parts with disused, abandoned and the new tag will produce the whole network for later special maps. Next comes the historic society of blah city and they want to map the medieval street pattern. Half a year later they have a project about Roman times and want to map the castellum that once stood where now the city centre is. For such real ancient things: If they don't dig, they don't have coordinates ;-) And if they can dig nothing else is there and it's worth to map ;-) Mueck ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
On 31 July 2010 16:18, Heiko Jacobs heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote: A former railway between Ittersbach and Pforzheim I could map 90% because there are enough traces (gravel, embankments, cuttings, bridges, ...) but 10% are levveled for farmland or residential ares including buildings. But the way can be reconstrcuted May I ask why bother? OSM is not a historic map, am I right?. What use do I have of the information that once here there was a railway when there are no traces, nothing to be found, nothing to be feared? -- Best regards, mit freundlichen Grüssen, meilleurs sentiments, Pozdrowienia, Michał Borsuk ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
Michał Borsuk schrieb: May I ask why bother? OSM is not a historic map, am I right?. What use do I have of the information that once here there was a railway when there are no traces, nothing to be found, nothing to be feared? There are a lot of things inside OSM that for my opinion are bothering. But I don't delete them ... Cartinus schrieb: You don't have to dig. Medieval maps are certainly out of copyright. ... and out of coordinates ... surveying with suitable precision started long time after medieval ... It seems that you both don't read my first mail? Heiko Jacobs schrieb: ... Sometimes the traces of a railway are very virtual: ... Sometimes no trace exist anymore ... For this I'm searching a word ... Another word I found for this sort of historic ways: razed So at the moment 4 words may be good candidates for it: - transformed - converted - removed - razed Mueck ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] totally abandoned rails
On Saturday 31 July 2010 20:58:59 Heiko Jacobs wrote: Heiko Jacobs schrieb: ... Sometimes the traces of a railway are very virtual: ... Sometimes no trace exist anymore ... For this I'm searching a word ... If you don't map it, then you don't need the word - that is why you don't get much support from other people finding it. On Saturday 31 July 2010 20:58:59 Heiko Jacobs wrote: Cartinus schrieb: You don't have to dig. Medieval maps are certainly out of copyright. ... and out of coordinates ... surveying with suitable precision started long time after medieval ... How are you going to find accurate coordinates for something that is no longer there like your railway? What you described previously were approximations based on other things. How accurate is tracing lakes from landsat images? How accurate is the PGS data most coastlines in OSM are based on? How accurate is a GPS on a wooded mountain trail or in a typical city centre? Look up map warping with your favourite search engine to see what people are doing with historical maps and known points. OSM is full of inaccurate data. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-hr] Plan Grada Sinja
On 29.07.2010 09:00, Valent Turkovic wrote: On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 12:43:28 +, Valent Turkovic wrote: Ljudi s OSM liste pitaju gdje je OSM atttibucija? Što da im odgovorim? Samo nađi nekoga s laserskim printerom, otprintajte na naljepnicu OSM atribuciju, izrežeš i naljepiš. Gotovo za 10 minuta. Da,zaboravio sam na to:-(... Da bi se to ispravilo postavio sam pitanje na kanalu #osm-hr kako bi trebao glasiti tekst.Obzirom na tekst na stranici http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F dodobas je predlozio sljedece: Podaci karte su vlasništvo Openstreetmap projekta i njegovih korisnika dostupni pod Creative Commons BY-SA licencom te staviti i logo OSM. Molim i ostale da se ukljuce sa prijedlozima da bih mogao to u ponedeljak ispraviti. Hvala na pomoći. ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
Re: [OSM-talk-be] WikiProject Belgium
1. The help newbie is a link to the (translated) Beginners guide. 2. I have put the potential sources on a separate page. 3. A lot of municipals have a broke link, what do i do with that? Op 30-jul-2010, om 17:49 heeft Ben Laenen het volgende geschreven: Ivo De Broeck wrote: Hi, I am a newbie at OSM. I saw the Wikiproject Belgium and the pages were IMHO a little outdated (most 2008) and i found the necessary information at Wikiproject Netherlands. That s the reason i put a line help newbie on the Wikiproject Belgium, i hope it will be useful. Well, the Wikiproject Belgium page is the start page for Belgian related issues. While the newbie information is valuable, it's not really part of it. The links to get help are very prominently put on the main page of the wiki which would be the first thing a new user would see, and the link is in the navigation box on the left as well. It may be a good idea to translate the Wikiproject Belgium in dutch and french (and german?). To do that, i suggest to in a first step put all information separated pages (like Potential sources) and put a link on the Wikiproject Belgium - page. Most things have already been split up. Only the potential sources should have gone to its own page. About translating: first make sure the English version is alright and not likely to change a lot anymore. Keeping the translations up to date requires a lot of work. Then we can discuss which links are needed on the Wikiproject Belgium -page and start to translate some pages. In my opinion a lot of pages can be kept in english but some need translation. I hope i can connivence a lot of new users by a remake of the Wikiproject Belgium-page. Personally I'd like to see something like http://openstreetmap.nl for Belgium. That looks much more attractive than a wiki. Greetings Ben Ivo De Broeck Valleilaan 13 3360 KORBEEK-LO ivo.debro...@gmail.com tel 016 43 84 93 gsm +32 486 17 61 13 ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:27:43 John F. Eldredge wrote: I have to admit that I am bad about not bothering to enter a comment, particularly if all I have been doing is fixing the alignment of streets to better conform to the Yahoo aerial view. snip Don't forget, the Yahoo! aerials might not be exactly aligned in all areas. I have found here in Korea the aerials are a little off in some places, but correct in others. I generally move the aerial layer until some obvious feature lines up with a GPS trace (either my own, or downloaded), then I start tracing other features from the aerials. For example, in my town the aerials are off by about 10m south and 8m east. I have to slide the layer up and left to align to the GPS. Of course, it's true the GPS traces are also off by 5, 10, or more metres, but you can overcome this by taking the average of many traces along the same road. In my case, the obvious aerial feature I use is an oval running track. I have collected several GPS traces of this track, and they all agree with each other. I apologise if you silently inferred that of course I align the aerials first before I start fixing streets, but maybe this is new information for some people. Best wishes, Andrew PS I always try and put some changeset comment in, but I had/have no idea if anyone reads them. I also make mistakes such as not changing the comment if I do two changesets in a row, or sometimes leaving the comment blank. Oh well. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
James Livingston lists at sunsetutopia.com writes: For casual editing, I'm not sure what I could put in that would be useful. Often I start off adding some street numbers I've collected, and then trace those houses from nearmap, and then start tracing a creek, and then start doing something when that ends. When I set the changeset comment, I don't know exactly what I'll be fixing up - I know the location, but you can get that from the changeset anyway without any comment. Wouldn't it make more sense for changeset comments to be set when closing, or at least be changeable afterwards (as, for example, log messages in version control systems)? The editor I use, Merkaartor, creates a new changeset every time you press the Upload button, and prompts then for the comment. This means that I do often upload a single task (such as a single mapping trip) in several changesets 'part one', 'part two' etc, but that doesn't seem a bad thing. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
Both the police and ambulance service spend a lot of their time on non-emergency items as do hospitals, doctors, etc. If you want to write an app that lists the police under an emergencies menu/button then go ahead but you don't need to change the OSM data to do it. Kevin On 30 July 2010 23:14, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: From my point of view the tags make perfect sense, if I have an emergency and I need police, fire or ambulance assistance then I'll look for emergency rather than amenity. snipped ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Am 30.07.2010 13:18, schrieb Frederik Ramm: To them, I say: Yes, you're right, it can be a pain sometimes, but if you practice it for a while, it will be an easy routine. I'm doing this day by day while doing software development - but there it has a much higher value: Very often you can't get the reason of a code change only by looking at the differences. If I add a missing road to the road network, it's pretty clear what the reason was. I think some comments are really useful, e.g. if the change are potentially annoying another user, like: removed a duplicate node is a valuable message to the other one out there, that I think he has added a duplicate. In a lot of other cases, comments are only a waste of time. If writing English takes you too long, use your national language, that's no problem. And you don't have to write long sentences, a few words are sufficient. But that little bit of time you spend when committing your changes adds so much value! For which audience? There are people who actively watch out their area what changes there. That's fine and valueable. But IMHO it's *their job* to make sense of the changes, not the mappers job. Don't be fooled; the small changeset comment that you enter when uploading stuff *will* be read by many people. I don't think so. Do you have numbers? Done well, changeset comments are tremendously helpful. For what? First of all, you probably need better diff tools (I mentioned that before :-), not better changeset comments ... Regards, ULFL P.S: Your whole mail was the wrong way round. It was: Comments are s helpful, please do it and your lame if not, but it should have been: Look, this and that and those things are a lot easier for others if you add a comment, please do it. This way you might convince more people ... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Saturday, July 31, 2010 12:55:28 pm Ed Avis wrote: For casual editing, I'm not sure what I could put in that would be useful. Often I start off adding some street numbers I've collected, and then trace those houses from nearmap, and then start tracing a creek, and then start doing something when that ends. When I set the changeset comment, I don't know exactly what I'll be fixing up - I know the location, but you can get that from the changeset anyway without any comment. Wouldn't it make more sense for changeset comments to be set when closing, or at least be changeable afterwards (as, for example, log messages in version control systems)? The editor I use, Merkaartor, creates a new changeset every time you press the Upload button, and prompts then for the comment. This means that I do often upload a single task (such as a single mapping trip) in several changesets 'part one', 'part two' etc, but that doesn't seem a bad thing. josm will not upload a changeset if the comments field is blank - but it prefills the comment field with the last comment, which is worse than blank. At the same time mercurial and subversion from the command line will not permit a push/commit without a comment - this has kept me 'honest' - if josm did not prefill, it would be ideal. Given of course the fact that most people would like to be 'good' and make meaningful comments, but often forget to do this. -- Regards Kenneth Gonsalves Senior Associate NRC-FOSS at AU-KBC ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Liz wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote: Dear all, we've had the changeset feature for quite a while now and I believe it is very helpful in a number of ways. I thought I'd have a look at the documentation provided for the documentation called changeset comment The documentation I found was at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:comment and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changesets and these give a completely different slant on the changeset comment. They discuss them being optional and note that anything mandatory annoys some mappers who will retaliate with garbage comments. Thanks to the persons who pointed out changeset comments I know realise that I am quite free to write anything or nothing useful. Yes I can see their potential use, however would the other persons in this thread who are dogmatic about their use read the existing documentation on the documentation. The stuff I read changed within hours. Of course you can read the wiki history to see what it did say at the time wrote the email. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
2010/7/31 Kevin Peat ke...@kevinpeat.com: Both the police and ambulance service spend a lot of their time on non-emergency items as do hospitals, doctors, etc. If you want to write an app that lists the police under an emergencies menu/button then go ahead but you don't need to change the OSM data to do it. I think it must be reminded that disscussion started when amenity=water_hydrant didn't sound so obvious... I think problem is not that we need or we want emergency=*, weather=*, whatever=*, but that amenity is overcrowded - period. If that can be solved introducing meaningful new name spaces like emergency, which could give easy way to filter emergency items, why not? What is cost of this? 1) Changing it in wiki - one day tops 2) Changing it in db - mass convertation, doable in one shot 3) Add presets to JOSM - also one day tops I think you over analyze situation too much. Change selected group of tags which makes sense (we have already discussed about it), finialised it for now, and inform about this change osm-talk. And do it. Mappers will catch on. Cheers, Peter. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31/07/2010 10:05, Ulf Lamping wrote: There are people who actively watch out their area what changes there. That's fine and valueable. But IMHO it's *their job* to make sense of the changes, not the mappers job. What a selfish attitude for a supposedly co-operative project. It may be obvious to you what the changes are and especially why because you did them. It isn't necessarily clear to someone looking at it, not least because our tools for looking at changes aren't well developed. For example, it is hard, though not impossible, to spot that a way has been reversed; a helpful comment slip road was in the wrong direction reassures me that this person is making a serious change because I can see that they were probably correct straight away. I don't understand your attitude at all: it hardly takes a moment to add a helpful comment, but many minutes or hours to make the change itself. It is hardly a burden. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
Am 31.07.2010 11:19, schrieb Peteris Krisjanis: If that can be solved introducing meaningful new name spaces like emergency, which could give easy way to filter emergency items, why not? What is cost of this? 1) Changing it in wiki - one day tops 2) Changing it in db - mass convertation, doable in one shot 3) Add presets to JOSM - also one day tops 4) Change it in every map renderer / router / other software that is out there - hundreds (or already even thousands?) of applications Teaching each and every mapper out there that the tag has changed and they should no longer use the old one (not every mapper uses presets). Confused mappers that feels unsafe how to map something, as the tags changes all the time - a feeling, not necessarily a fact. ... If you think about the costs and benefits of something, you should know *all* costs first. Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 19:24, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: I don't understand your attitude at all: it hardly takes a moment to add a helpful comment, but many minutes or hours to make the change itself. It is hardly a burden. You gave a very simplistic comment example, how about something more likely to occur by people doing large numbers of changes, for example, realigning roads, fixing up names from photos, drawing in schools and parks and playgrounds and buildings and pitches and How exactly are you supposed to compress all the possible changes you've made, into a single line, and not spend a similar amount of time documenting what you did, why you did it, who paid for your time and other expenses, what the weather was like, how many birds were tweating, and any jokes you may have receive in an email while doing all that... Frankly I'd rather spend my time mapping than telling everyone to the nth degree what my life story about why I made a change. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Am 31.07.2010 11:24, schrieb David Earl: On 31/07/2010 10:05, Ulf Lamping wrote: There are people who actively watch out their area what changes there. That's fine and valueable. But IMHO it's *their job* to make sense of the changes, not the mappers job. What a selfish attitude for a supposedly co-operative project. No, that's a lesson learned from working in the german Wikipedia. All those it would be nice if you would do It's no good to tell people that they have to do this and that and please don't forget whatnot. All for the best of the project. It annoyed me so much, that I no longer work for the wikipedia. For me: The less things you should do to be a good mapper, the better for OSM. Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 11:24 AM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.comwrote: I'm in the group who think that changeset comments are waste of time because: - you may have vandalism with nice comments (and good edits with crappy comments) - this is an habit comming from software development and software version control. But mapping is not development, you don't develop or create something new or implement a design, you just copy facts. Which means that all information are easy to retrieve from the changeset itself. A software could summarize the changeset more accurately than humans. - we are a community. If I am working in a workspace with 100 colleagues, I wouldn't have this group claiming I do this, I do that every 5 minutes if no one else is checking his work. Watch carefully what people are doing, talk to each other or shut up. - the OSM gems are not the consumers, not the people watching their area but real contributors, volunteers working on their spare time. We have regularly professionals coming and asking to this community to work like professionals with good comments and sourcing. I remember someone who said that OSM should not become a project like wikipedia where newcomers are reluctant to contribute when it becomes too restrictive. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31/07/2010 10:50, John Smith wrote: On 31 July 2010 19:24, David Earlda...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: I don't understand your attitude at all: it hardly takes a moment to add a helpful comment, but many minutes or hours to make the change itself. It is hardly a burden. You gave a very simplistic comment example, how about something more likely to occur by people doing large numbers of changes, for example, realigning roads, fixing up names from photos, drawing in schools and parks and playgrounds and buildings and pitches and How exactly are you supposed to compress all the possible changes you've made, into a single line, and not spend a similar amount of time documenting what you did, why you did it, who paid for your time and other expenses, what the weather was like, how many birds were tweating, and any jokes you may have receive in an email while doing all that... Frankly I'd rather spend my time mapping than telling everyone to the nth degree what my life story about why I made a change. sad, sad, sad to be so selfish towards your colleagues. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 20:17, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: sad, sad, sad to be so selfish towards your colleagues. And you are selfish to be making demands that some deem unreasonable... see I can twist logic just as much as you can... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 20:17, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: sad, sad, sad to be so selfish towards your colleagues. Oh and I'm still waiting for the comment example based on people that make a lot more edits than a simply changing the direction a one way street runs... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Saturday, July 31, 2010 03:53:19 pm John Smith wrote: On 31 July 2010 20:17, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: sad, sad, sad to be so selfish towards your colleagues. Oh and I'm still waiting for the comment example based on people that make a lot more edits than a simply changing the direction a one way street runs... I simply say finetuning areaname -- Regards Kenneth Gonsalves Senior Associate NRC-FOSS at AU-KBC ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Am 31.07.2010 12:17, schrieb David Earl: On 31/07/2010 10:50, John Smith wrote: Frankly I'd rather spend my time mapping than telling everyone to the nth degree what my life story about why I made a change. sad, sad, sad to be so selfish towards your colleagues. Calling someone selfish when he spends his spare time mapping stuff and adds that to OSM is simply bullshit. Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Timeout uploading GPX traces
On 30/07/2010 09:40, Ed Avis wrote: problem with 100Kb then I'd be inclined to blame your browser. Which browser do you use? (I use Firefox 3.7 on Windows, with no http proxy server configured.) Are you sure? I didn't think it had been released yet. 3.6.8 for me (There's a Beta v4 available) Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: We have regularly professionals coming and asking to this community to work like professionals with good comments and sourcing. Sourcing might be the only meaningfull comment I could see. This is the only important information that cannot be retrieved by software and is required to justify some actions e.g. features displacements. We should better replace 'comment' by 'source' in the changeset tags (and leave it optional not like comments in JOSM). Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31/07/2010 11:52, Pieren wrote: Sourcing might be the only meaningfull comment I could see. This is the only important information that cannot be retrieved by software and is required to justify some actions e.g. features displacements. We should better replace 'comment' by 'source' in the changeset tags (and leave it optional not like comments in JOSM). You can see the what but never the why. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: Total time 6 minutes Hundreds of hours, yeah right. What you have given is an absolute minimum time for someone who already understands to actually edit the files. You've skipped research, testing and deployment. The program I've been talking about uses osm2pgsql and mapnik so I'm well aware of them. If your smart you could probably add the emergency data without having to totally rerun osm2pgsql. Smart takes time to think about / time to code. You don't seem to have included any time for it in your 6 minutes. Also as you say you are well aware of osm2pgsql and mapnik, you might even say expert. So your 6 minutes is the time for an expert to make the changes - most people are not experts. Let me give you an alternate time-line at the other end of the scale: Receive and read bug report that map symbol for police no longer appears (2 min) Research why it no longer appears (20 minutes of reading wiki and mailing lists) Research on how to add emergency to the database (20 more minutes of reading the wiki) Deicide on process to fix bug (10 minute meeting between developer and server admin) Produce patch to fix issue (we'll go with your 6 min) Re-import database - this person doesn't understand osm well enough to do something 'clever' (20 min monitoring over a few days) Test (2 min) Work out why it doesn't appear (5 min - your patch is actually very slightly wrong btw, can you spot your mistake?) Test (2 min) Deploy to live server (another 20 min monitoring) Retest (2 min) Close bug (2 min) Total time: as near to 2 hours as makes no difference. Let's say the average is an hour - I think it's fair some people will do it in 10 minutes, some will will spend 2 hours trying to work out what to change and another hour on IRC asking for help! Let's say there are 100 people using mapnik / osm in the world - I'm sure it's more than that :) 1 * 100 = 100 hours just on mapnik. However the above is just for fun - lets replace my original statement with 'a lot of time' and move on... -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Hi John, On Samstag, 31. Juli 2010, John Smith wrote: On 31 July 2010 20:17, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: sad, sad, sad to be so selfish towards your colleagues. Oh and I'm still waiting for the comment example based on people that make a lot more edits than a simply changing the direction a one way street runs... I usually split my changesets into small chunks. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/werner2101/edits The only reason is to keep the changeset areas small and the possibility to add a meaningfull changeset comment for the next mapper. Please, John, add some comments to your changesets. e.g. for the changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5357611 a simple toy - toys comment is enough. BTW: I trapped into the last message issue of JOSM, too. Changeset 5358548 was a dupe nodes removal session. Regards Werner ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
2010/7/31 Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com: Am 31.07.2010 11:19, schrieb Peteris Krisjanis: If that can be solved introducing meaningful new name spaces like emergency, which could give easy way to filter emergency items, why not? What is cost of this? 1) Changing it in wiki - one day tops 2) Changing it in db - mass convertation, doable in one shot 3) Add presets to JOSM - also one day tops 4) Change it in every map renderer / router / other software that is out there - hundreds (or already even thousands?) of applications Really hunderds and thousands? I think it is more in tens ballpark, 20 at the best. And most of them developed actively by OSM community which follows news from it. Teaching each and every mapper out there that the tag has changed and they should no longer use the old one (not every mapper uses presets). And they never never never read wiki, or follow OSM news? Confused mappers that feels unsafe how to map something, as the tags changes all the time - a feeling, not necessarily a fact. In fact, mappers are *already* confused, because there is no one that strongly says - we do so - and everyone follows. It is strange that lot of old OSMers really don't dig what feelings community have against current tagging scheme. If you think about the costs and benefits of something, you should know *all* costs first. I know all costs, and biggest cost for tag incosistency is end of the project, because it drives new contrubitons away and make older contributors sooner or later throw the towel. Sometimes biggest cost comes from doing nothing, trying to believe that everything must stay the same. Cheers, Peter. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Hi Ulf, Ulf Lamping wrote: Calling someone selfish when he spends his spare time mapping stuff and adds that to OSM is simply bullshit. I, too, find your attitude funny. You spend an hour doing edits, then cannot be bothered to spend a minute to think of a good changeset comment. Instead, you say, it is the job of all the others who want to make sense of your edit to investigate, and spend certianly more than that one minute. That is indeed selfish, because you're saying that your time is more valuable than theirs. I'd appreciate very much if, in the future, you would contribute 1% less data and use the saved time to double the value of your contribution by telling your fellow mappers what you did in a changeset comment. And as I said to John, blaming insufficient tools is a cheap excuse. This is about paying respect to your fellow mappers, about being part of a community rather than just someone who dumps data onto a heap (let the others make sense of this). That is most certainly a selfish attitude. Just because you upload a change to OSM doesn't mean you're automatically not selfish. There are indeed people who spend their spare time mapping stuff and add it to OSM and half the community goes oh my god, can't that guy contribute to another project, he's stubborn, doesn't communicate about his edits, and does things all of us think wrong. You know we have several such cases in Germany on the regional and national level. You don't want to put yourself on a level with them, do you? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 22:05, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: That is indeed selfish, because you're saying that your time is more valuable than theirs. And you are saying their time is more valuable than the person contributing the data, this is going no where fast, people have their opinions and they are polar opposite and berating and belittling people doesn't seem to be shifting any opinions. And as I said to John, blaming insufficient tools is a cheap excuse. This is So is blaming others for not commenting exactly how you think they should, when up until a few hours ago the changeset comment was specifcally listed as optional, of course you fiddled that wiki to fit your opinion, and when others do something similar it you attack them for not following the status quo. Why is there such a double standard here? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 7:09 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.comwrote: On 31/07/2010 11:52, Pieren wrote: Sourcing might be the only meaningfull comment I could see. This is the only important information that cannot be retrieved by software and is required to justify some actions e.g. features displacements. We should better replace 'comment' by 'source' in the changeset tags (and leave it optional not like comments in JOSM). You can see the what but never the why. +1 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Saturday 31 July 2010 11:17:16 Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: josm will not upload a changeset if the comments field is blank - but it prefills the comment field with the last comment, which is worse than blank. At the same time mercurial and subversion from the command line will not permit a push/commit without a comment - this has kept me 'honest' - if josm did not prefill, it would be ideal. Given of course the fact that most people would like to be 'good' and make meaningful comments, but often forget to do this. Not to mention that prefilling actually helps the vandals and unwilling. They only have to type sod off once and JOSM dutifully repeats it every time for them. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote: You spend an hour doing edits, then cannot be bothered to spend a minute to think of a good changeset comment. so how do *you* summarise adding POIs and side streets and putting in maxspeed along a hundred km of highway? because i just put in the name of where i have been, that's all. and that is glaringly obvious from the bounding box ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote: You spend an hour doing edits, then cannot be bothered to spend a minute to think of a good changeset comment. so how do *you* summarise adding POIs and side streets and putting in maxspeed along a hundred km of highway? because i just put in the name of where i have been, that's all. and that is glaringly obvious from the bounding box Not necessarily. On changeset lists which does display the changeset comment, you only see the bbox coordinates and people have a poor grasp of which coordinates correspond to which location. You have to click on to the changeset page itself to see the map of the bbox (which is inconvenient if you want to check out several changesets), and the location is still not obvious if the bbox is zoomed in and you're not familiar with the area. So, it's not glaringly obvious. You have to do a bit of work to determine where the changeset is located. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On Saturday 31 July 2010 14:00:40 Peteris Krisjanis wrote: Teaching each and every mapper out there that the tag has changed and they should no longer use the old one (not every mapper uses presets). And they never never never read wiki, or follow OSM news? Actually if this thread was not pushed onto talk most people wouldn't have noticed this change at all until stuff didn't work anymore. Most people don't have the time to follow all the mammoth threads on tagging. And nobody puts all Key: and Tag: pages in his wiki watchlist. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
Work out why it doesn't appear (5 min - your patch is actually very slightly wrong btw, can you spot your mistake?) Spotted my friday afternoon coding did you. Glad to see someones on the ball!! However the above is just for fun - lets replace my original statement with 'a lot of time' and move on... Sounds sensible to me, I'm busy tracing new nearmap imagery. -- Cheers Ross ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Liz, Liz wrote: so how do *you* summarise adding POIs and side streets and putting in maxspeed along a hundred km of highway? because i just put in the name of where i have been, that's all. and that is glaringly obvious from the bounding box I believe that the changeset comment should be meaningful without any extra information. I'm not saying that it should be in any way an exhaustive description, duplicating the content. That would be stupid, and unnecessary work. I think that you have an excellent changeset comment right there: added POIs, side streets, maxspeed from trip along A1234 perfect. It tells people where you have edited, it tells them what you did, it even hints at the source. Most of all, it tells them that youare a human being, that you are diligent, and that you are respectful towards your fellow mappers. The exact same edit with a changeset comment of fixes may add the same data, but it sends a wholly different message to the community (take your pick from anywhere between nobody's gonna read this anyway to if you want to know what I did then go and find it out yourself). That's sad because, as I pointed out, if you get into the habit of writing good changeset comments then the additional work this causes is going to be practically zero, whereas the quality of the change increases dramatically. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On 31 July 2010 22:47, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: Sounds sensible to me, I'm busy tracing new nearmap imagery. With extremely useful changeset comments? :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 22:53, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: pick from anywhere between nobody's gonna read this anyway to if you want That's sad because, as I pointed out, if you get into the habit of writing good changeset comments then the additional work this causes is going to be practically zero, whereas the quality of the change increases dramatically. This might be a good application of crowd sourcing, specifically allowing others to add tags to changesets, and then these changesets become more useful as a statistical tool to figure out the more popular objects being mapped, or the inverse what needs to be mapped more. Then you just need one of those bubble cloud interfaces that make the popular/unpopular tags show with a bigger font. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 23:25, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: No. Equally valuable. But they are more. Only one person makes the edits, but more than one person look at the edits. Sure, if on average more than one person views the changeset information, is this really happening though? All wanted was to say: Please folks, add meaningful changeset comments. I think it is plain obvious that they are very useful, not only to me personally. Of about 20 people participating in this thread, only three seem to be of the opinion that changeset comments are a waste of time. Yes, people have their opinions and yes, some might be of that opinion, but luckily it is a small minority. And how many don't set meaningful tags and didn't contribute to this thread? I think there is a wide range of useful changeset comments; you're misrepresenting my statement if you say I was complaining about people not commenting excactly how I think they should. I'm just asking for meaningful changeset comments. So far no one has given a reasonable example for changesets with diverse activities, so please be more specific. No. Liz, helpfully, pointed out that the Wiki did not reflect what the community expects, as has been proven by this thread. I merely amended the Wiki to reflect that. If you carefully read the version history you will see that even before I made the change, the Wiki definitely said that the comment was used in many places; it just wasn't quite so obvious that people actually use it a lot. Back to lies, damn lies and statistics, 20 v 3 out of 5-10k active editors, it's not a very good sample size to be extrapolating from, if anything it shows a minority have a strong opinion one way or the other, and the rest just don't care. I'm not even starting to discuss Key:UUID here. Who said anything about that, I was talking about your spurious comment on the emergency=* thread... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Well, in my area at least (Nashville, TN, USA), the aerial images seem pretty well aligned with the actual street locations. The corrections I am speaking of tend to be needed only here and there, not overall. Much of the street location info on the OSM map in my area originated in the TIGER import (data collected, over decades, by census-takers), and some of the original mappers were pretty sloppy. You will have a neighborhood where all of the streets align with the aerial view, for example, except for one street that will be mapped 15 meters or so to the side of its actual location. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments From :mailto:a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk Date :Sat Jul 31 01:29:02 America/Chicago 2010 On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:27:43 John F. Eldredge wrote: I have to admit that I am bad about not bothering to enter a comment, particularly if all I have been doing is fixing the alignment of streets to better conform to the Yahoo aerial view. snip Don't forget, the Yahoo! aerials might not be exactly aligned in all areas. I have found here in Korea the aerials are a little off in some places, but correct in others. I generally move the aerial layer until some obvious feature lines up with a GPS trace (either my own, or downloaded), then I start tracing other features from the aerials. For example, in my town the aerials are off by about 10m south and 8m east. I have to slide the layer up and left to align to the GPS. Of course, it's true the GPS traces are also off by 5, 10, or more metres, but you can overcome this by taking the average of many traces along the same road. In my case, the obvious aerial feature I use is an oval running track. I have collected several GPS traces of this track, and they all agree with each other. I apologise if you silently inferred that of course I align the aerials first before I start fixing streets, but maybe this is new information for some people. Best wishes, Andrew PS I always try and put some changeset comment in, but I had/have no idea if anyone reads them. I also make mistakes such as not changing the comment if I do two changesets in a row, or sometimes leaving the comment blank. Oh well. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31 July 2010 21:09, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: You can see the what but never the why. Most changesets seem to summerise what they did not why they did it, the only why that you could get from a changeset is from any source tags as someone else pointed out, however there seems to be a distinct lack of emphasis on sourcing data properly, which this would be much more useful to help people decide if they should touch up the data or not. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
One thing I found unfortunate is that when we switched to API 0.6 to support changeset comments we also limited the length of values to 255 characters. So because of that you end up with really long run-on sentences like that to describe large changes making it hard to write them and to understand them. It would be much nicer if I could Write a short summary of the changes I'm making, like this. Then go on to elaborate a bit on what I did, why I did it, and what sources I used etc. Perhaps explaining how I'm not really sure about that one track by the sports stadium, due to the bad GPS reception I had there. Sometimes my changes in Git turn into little mini blog-posts about the problem I was solving, it's unfortunate that I can't provide similar details on OpenStreetMap, at least it's 255 characters, not 255 bytes like on Wikipedia. Anyway, since we're making pleas, here's one of my own: Can the maintainers of JOSM please get rid of the silly feature that makes changeset comments manditory? It results in a lot of garbage like the ..., some mapping, fixed stuff, or none of your business examples which Frederik cited. I'd rather have history with no comments at all than expending mental energy on comments that look like they were copy/pasted from http://whatthecommit.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: John, John Smith wrote: On 31 July 2010 22:05, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: That is indeed selfish, because you're saying that your time is more valuable than theirs. And you are saying their time is more valuable than the person contributing the data No. Equally valuable. Maybe equally valuable to the universe. But my time is certainly more valuable to myself than anyone else's time is valuable to me. Maybe that's why I'm not on this list telling other people what to do with their time. All wanted was to say: Please folks, add meaningful changeset comments. I think it is plain obvious that they are very useful, not only to me personally. Of about 20 people participating in this thread, only three seem to be of the opinion that changeset comments are a waste of time. Yes, people have their opinions and yes, some might be of that opinion, but luckily it is a small minority. I'm of the opinion that good changeset comments are useful, and yes, please folks, add meaningful changeset comments. On the other hand, I'm quite grateful to those of you who have been helping map the world regardless of whether or not you've been adding good changeset comments. Thanks. So please, if you think changeset comments for a particular change would be a waste of your time, don't add them. I'd rather have you enjoy your mapping experience than resent it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Hi, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: Can the maintainers of JOSM please get rid of the silly feature that makes changeset comments manditory? It results in a lot of garbage like the ..., some mapping, fixed stuff, or none of your business examples which Frederik cited. It's a two-sided thing. Yes, making it mandatory causes some people to enter stupid things. However, if it is optional then some people who would otherwise be willing and able to enter a meaningful comment might think that it doesn't matter whether the enter one or not! Someone else said that JOSM was by default re-using the same message as last time; I think that's the first thing that needs to go (maybe only do that if the last commit was less than 24hrs ago). I could imagine dropping the mandatory changeset comment, but when left empty, display a pop-up that explains why changeset comments are important and ask the user to reconsider. (Indeed that dialog could be shown whenever the changeset comment is less than 15 characters or so.) And of course that dialog must not have a don't ask me again feature. I agree that someone who wants to be a jerk has the right to do so. But I'm not sure if allowing that is a core requirement for editors. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Ulf Lamping wrote: There are people who actively watch out their area what changes there. That's fine and valueable. But IMHO it's *their job* to make sense of the changes, not the mappers job. [...] Don't be fooled; the small changeset comment that you enter when uploading stuff *will* be read by many people. I don't think so. Do you have numbers? Even if only a single person tries to understand your changesets, it will take them far longer to figure out what you have done than it would take you to write it down. If you think that watching one's area is a valuable activity, it makes sense to add changeset comments. With tools like OWL, it's now actually feasible to look at edits in an area - but if mappers don't write down what they have done, it would take a lot of time to understand the edits. There's another situation when changeset comments are useful, and that's when I try to fix broken data (and find out why they are broken), as that involves browsing though the elements' history. With changeset comments, it's easier to identify suspects among the edits. First of all, you probably need better diff tools (I mentioned that before :-), not better changeset comments ... There are excellent diff tools for source code. That doesn't stop people from adding version control messages. Of course, I'd love better diff tools, too, but they don't operate on the same level of abstraction as changeset comments. Finally, I want to point out that I don't want rules forcing people to add changeset comments. If people resent the act of adding the comments, their comments tend to be nonsense anyway. I just want to say that, yes, there are people who read those comments, and it would be great if more mappers added them - voluntarily, because they have decided that it is a useful feature. Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Currently I'm cleaning up in Ottawa, I have over 8,000 errors to clean up left and recently I've probably cleaned at least a couple of thousand errors so far. Things like incorrect street names, where I have a CANVEC source that helps enormously, connecting streets up so you can run routing software. etc. Are you seriously suggesting for each correction I do a write up saying why I or Validator think its wrong and my source for the correction? Thanks Cheerio John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 1 August 2010 02:18, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I could imagine dropping the mandatory changeset comment, but when left empty, display a pop-up that explains why changeset comments are important and ask the user to reconsider. (Indeed that dialog could be shown whenever the changeset comment is less than 15 characters or so.) And of course that dialog must not have a don't ask me again feature. Are you trying to encourage people into migrating to potlatch? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
john whelan wrote: Currently I'm cleaning up in Ottawa, I have over 8,000 errors to clean up left and recently I've probably cleaned at least a couple of thousand errors so far. Things like incorrect street names, where I have a CANVEC source that helps enormously, connecting streets up so you can run routing software. etc. Are you seriously suggesting for each correction I do a write up saying why I or Validator think its wrong and my source for the correction? Usually, corrections can be grouped - for example, by fixing all the incorrectly joined junctions in an area first, then uploading with an appropriate changeset comment. That's a lot of errors, by the way. Have those errors been created by humans or by some import? Everything I modify was manually created by a human being, so it's a reasonable assumption that someone will be interested in my reasons for changing their work. They might even learn something from it and don't repeat the same mistakes in the future, thus I might actually be saving time that I would otherwise have spent on fixing those future errors. The situation could be somewhat different when fixing import errors, which is something I'm not familiar with. Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
As pointed out, you only have 255 characters. No one is suggesting a book needs to be written. There is a difference between useful and exhaustive. All we are asking for is useful comments. Cleaning up validator problems in Ottowa using a CANVEC source or pull the reference to CANVEC out into a source=* changeset tag. Seriously. It is that simple people! I just ran into some problem roads last night along Kansas highway 18 where it would have been a big help to have some useful comments in the history. If you are in an area with more than a few active mappers I can *guarantee* you that at least one other person is looking at your changeset comments. I live in the middle of nowhere Kansas and I know at least one other person is watching the area. Toby On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 11:30 AM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote: Currently I'm cleaning up in Ottawa, I have over 8,000 errors to clean up left and recently I've probably cleaned at least a couple of thousand errors so far. Things like incorrect street names, where I have a CANVEC source that helps enormously, connecting streets up so you can run routing software. etc. Are you seriously suggesting for each correction I do a write up saying why I or Validator think its wrong and my source for the correction? Thanks Cheerio John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Frederik Ramm wrote: I could imagine dropping the mandatory changeset comment, but when left empty, display a pop-up that explains why changeset comments are important and ask the user to reconsider. (Indeed that dialog could be shown whenever the changeset comment is less than 15 characters or so.) And of course that dialog must not have a don't ask me again feature. I believe that people will only provide truly useful changeset comments if they do so voluntarily. Not to mention that some react badly to rules, and will rebel against something they *would* have done voluntarily when they are forced to do it. Therefore, I think that annoying people with permanent dialogs is highly counter-productive. Instead, I suggest the following course of action: - remove requirement to fill in the changeset field from editors - improve the tools that *use* the changeset comments Why? Because mappers who regularly use features like edit histories themselves will actually experience why changeset comments are useful. For example, getting rid of those big edits from the history on osm.org would improve the usefulness, and thus acceptance, of changeset comments far more than any mailing list thread could. Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Hi, Tobias Knerr wrote: I believe that people will only provide truly useful changeset comments if they do so voluntarily. But at least one person in this thread has said something along the lines oh I didn't know these were so important actually. *That* is surely something that could have been avoided by an editor informing them accordingly. For example, getting rid of those big edits from the history on osm.org would improve the usefulness, and thus acceptance, of changeset comments far more than any mailing list thread could. I hear that this is in the works. - However I'd still advocate not creating big edits in the first place. When I modified 170 million nodes in the US last year, I made sure to group them at least by county if not smaller clusters, to avoid having thousands of changesets spanning the whole US. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31-7-2010 18:49, Toby Murray wrote: If you are in an area with more than a few active mappers I can *guarantee* you that at least one other person is looking at your changeset comments. I live in the middle of nowhere Kansas and I know at least one other person is watching the area. Even if you are the only one editing a certain area, it is still useful to use changeset comments. If someone else starts to work in your area, or vice versa, it's still useful to know what happened. -- Lennard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com writes: Frankly I'd rather spend my time mapping than telling everyone to the nth degree what my life story about why I made a change. Steady on. Nobody says you should repeat in the comment what is already clear from the changes made. That would be redundant and pointless. Only the 'why' not the 'what' needs to be stated. That normally shouldn't be more than one sentence. The only times I've needed to give a long-winded explanation is when correcting existing data which I believe is wrong - in that case you ought to cite your sources and explain why the new version is correct, otherwise we could get into edit wars, which would waste a lot more time than writing a changeset comment. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Another way to look at it is that it's your own time you are saving. If another mapper has a question about your changes and they have to contact you and you need to reply, that uses a lot more time than a quick explanation attached to the change when it was uploaded. Certainly doing so takes a lot less time than posting messages on this list. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Liz edodd at billiau.net writes: so how do *you* summarise adding POIs and side streets and putting in maxspeed along a hundred km of highway? because i just put in the name of where i have been, that's all. I'd also mention how I found the data - spotted from the car window as I drove past, or painstakingly surveyed on foot? That can help someone else if they need to verify the exact position of some post box to the nearest metre, or whatever. So I would say 'POIs from car window driving through X' or 'mapping trip on foot to X'. (You could instead tag source=survey;survey=foot or something equally Byzantine on every single object, but nobody is pedantic enough to do that. So a short note in plain English on the changeset helps.) -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
john whelan jwhelan0112 at gmail.com writes: Currently I'm cleaning up in Ottawa, I have over 8,000 errors to clean up left and recently I've probably cleaned at least a couple of thousand errors so far. Things like incorrect street names, where I have a CANVEC source that helps enormously, connecting streets up so you can run routing software. etc. Are you seriously suggesting for each correction I do a write up saying why I or Validator think its wrong and my source for the correction? I do something similar cleaning the data using the http://keepright.ipax.at/ data checker, primarily fixing junctions so the map is routable. Ordinarily I'll just write 'fixed junctions' as the comment. Only if I think there is some potential doubt or controversy will I note my reasons for making a particular assumption. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5332272 is an example: OS indicates this road joins the other one to its west, and the aerial photo shows at least a gap between buildings, so I'll assume it does. But that long message is the exception. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Timeout uploading GPX traces
Dave F. davefox at madasafish.com writes: I use Firefox 3.7 on Windows, Are you sure? You're right - it's 3.6.3. I have seen the same problem with other Firefox versions and with Google Chrome, however. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 31-7-2010 19:54, Ed Avis wrote: I do something similar cleaning the data using the http://keepright.ipax.at/ data checker, primarily fixing junctions so the map is routable. Ordinarily I'll just write 'fixed junctions' as the comment. Only if I think there is some potential doubt or controversy will I note my reasons for making a particular assumption. 'fixed junctions based on keepright reports' There, made it much more useful. At least other mappers can see what the change was based on, and if they've actually been there can be more certain that their edits may be better than yours, as they're based on survey. -- Lennard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Only the 'why' not the 'what' needs to be stated. That normally shouldn't be more than one sentence. You are two, with David Earl saying that. But that's a big difference with what Frederik and others are saying. They want a summary, a 'what' and 'why', not just a 'why'. Again, most of the 'what' could be summarized automically (20 POI's added, 2 ways displaced, 5 restrictions added, etc) and is far better than reading comments. I have seen so many nice comments from newcomers where changesets contained so many mistakes... About the 'why', I can already tell you : - if someone displaces 20 nodes, the 'why' is because this person things that his source is more accurate than the previous contribution. The 'why' is a more accurate source. - if someone adds 100 buildings in an empty area, it's because this person found a source for those buildings. - if someone renames a pub or a restaurant, it's because this person thinks that his knowledge is more recent than the previous contribution (source=survey or personnal knowledge) About the required comment in JOSM, I think that JOSM is the only editor doing this. Remember that I'm the one who first complained about this feature on this list and after a long discussion the compromise was to repeat the previous comment (which is good enough for me). The proposal to make a pop-up explaining comments importance as suggested by Frederik today was also raised at that discussion but nothing was made since then. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] My Vote for most point dense part of OSM
Total trivia. Ever wonder where the most dense mapping in the OSM is? There are a few candidates: Paris is impressive: http://osm.org/go/0BOd2jSc But if you look at how it's built, a lot of points are shared in relations (as it should be, but not winning the most dense award) In Germany there is a very dense field of buildings: http://osm.org/go/0MbEX3rqa-- It's so dense, it doesn't really render well even in the closest tile set. It's a lot of points. It's doesn't win in my books though because it's such a limited area. My vote for most point dense is part of Bakersfield, California: http://osm.org/go/TY4n4MnA My favorite part is how they rendered the street edges into the residential ways. They even include out buildings and trees. Even at the closest zoom, potlatch is all thumbs editing. Wow. Cool maps! John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 1 August 2010 03:43, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Another way to look at it is that it's your own time you are saving. If another mapper has a question about your changes and they have to contact you and you need to reply, that uses a lot more time than a quick explanation attached to the change when it was uploaded. I can count using my fingers and toes the number of times I've been emailed about a changeset, and most of them weren't even questioning what or why I did what I did, but simply complaining about the changeset comment, it took far less time than if I'd set hundreds if not thousands of changeset comments accurately reflecting what I was doing, and that's assuming I didn't make any mistakes that may have mislead people about the changes I'd made. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] My Vote for most point dense part of OSM
Wow that is impressive. Although they could have saved themselves a little time by using highway=turning_circle for all those cul-de-sacs and not having to render a perfect circle by hand :) On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 1:11 PM, John Harvey j...@johnharveyphoto.com wrote: Total trivia. Ever wonder where the most dense mapping in the OSM is? There are a few candidates: Paris is impressive: http://osm.org/go/0BOd2jSc But if you look at how it's built, a lot of points are shared in relations (as it should be, but not winning the most dense award) In Germany there is a very dense field of buildings: http://osm.org/go/0MbEX3rqa-- It's so dense, it doesn't really render well even in the closest tile set. It's a lot of points. It's doesn't win in my books though because it's such a limited area. My vote for most point dense is part of Bakersfield, California: http://osm.org/go/TY4n4MnA My favorite part is how they rendered the street edges into the residential ways. They even include out buildings and trees. Even at the closest zoom, potlatch is all thumbs editing. Wow. Cool maps! John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] My Vote for most point dense part of OSM
Hi, The area in Berlin you're referring to is 'The Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe [...] the central place for remembrance and a place of warning.' http://www.visitberlin.de/english/sightseeing/e_si_sehenswuerdigkeiten-details.php?code=16440 There are quite a few photos on the site (s.a.) - impressive too. Cheers, Esther On 31/07/2010 19:26, Toby Murray wrote: Wow that is impressive. Although they could have saved themselves a little time by using highway=turning_circle for all those cul-de-sacs and not having to render a perfect circle by hand :) On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 1:11 PM, John Harveyj...@johnharveyphoto.com wrote: Total trivia. Ever wonder where the most dense mapping in the OSM is? There are a few candidates: Paris is impressive: http://osm.org/go/0BOd2jSc But if you look at how it's built, a lot of points are shared in relations (as it should be, but not winning the most dense award) In Germany there is a very dense field of buildings: http://osm.org/go/0MbEX3rqa-- It's so dense, it doesn't really render well even in the closest tile set. It's a lot of points. It's doesn't win in my books though because it's such a limited area. My vote for most point dense is part of Bakersfield, California: http://osm.org/go/TY4n4MnA My favorite part is how they rendered the street edges into the residential ways. They even include out buildings and trees. Even at the closest zoom, potlatch is all thumbs editing. Wow. Cool maps! John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com writes: If another mapper has a question about your changes and they have to contact you and you need to reply, that uses a lot more time than a quick explanation attached to the change when it was uploaded. I can count using my fingers and toes the number of times I've been emailed about a changeset, and most of them weren't even questioning what or why I did what I did, but simply complaining about the changeset comment, I guess, in that case, they might have been curious about your changes and went to see more about what you were doing and why - and asked you to put in a comment to help in future. Even if you disagree about the value of comments; even if you never feel the need to review other mappers' changes or offer advice, it might be a good idea to humour these people and add a short note. In future, they might help you by spotting a mistake you made or making useful suggestions. It's good to have these extra people reviewing your work, even if they are an annoyance at first. it took far less time than if I'd set hundreds if not thousands of changeset comments accurately reflecting what I was doing, and that's assuming I didn't make any mistakes that may have mislead people about the changes I'd made. Agreed. I think the comment should say 'why' not 'what', and if the change is derived from something other than ground survey, cite the source used. It shouldn't take more than a few seconds. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Pieren pieren3 at gmail.com writes: About the 'why', I can already tell you :- if someone displaces 20 nodes, the 'why' is because this person things that his source is more accurate than the previous contribution. The 'why' is a more accurate source. Indeed - and all that's needed is to mention this source in the comment. 'Adjusted road positions based on GPS traces' - if someone adds 100 buildings in an empty area, it's because this person found a source for those buildings. 'Traced buildings from aerial photo' or 'from OS map' or from whatever source you used. - if someone renames a pub or a restaurant, it's because this person thinks that his knowledge is more recent than the previous contribution In that case perhaps no special comment is needed, though myself I'd still add a note saying 'I walked past this pub and the name has changed'. Yes, of course it is obvious that the reason for making a change is I have better information or I believe that the new version is correct. But that's not what is meant by the 'why' of the change; rather, a useful hint about where the data came from, so that somebody else remapping the same area can make an informed decision about whether his or her data, in turn, is better quality than what's on the map. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On 1 August 2010 04:39, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Agreed. I think the comment should say 'why' not 'what', and if the change is derived from something other than ground survey, cite the source used. It shouldn't take more than a few seconds. I generally always use source=* (and attribution=* tags where applicable). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Lennard ldp at xs4all.nl writes: I do something similar cleaning the data using the http://keepright.ipax.at/ data checker, primarily fixing junctions so the map is routable. Ordinarily I'll just write 'fixed junctions' as the comment. 'fixed junctions based on keepright reports' I would put that if the keepright report suggested what changes to make. But it doesn't tell you any particular change, it just flags things, and the change to make is decided by the mapper. (In many cases keepright flags an error but I ignore it, because there isn't strong evidence that the OSM data is wrong - so both whether to make a change and what change to make are decided by human judgement.) But still, you're right it is probably worth mentioning keepright - it is another kind of 'why' - so I'll do that in future. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Many are very simple, St instead of Street, doesn't sound much but it stops some search and other tools. Multiple imports each with different defaults, some forgot the street name, many didn't import where an existing street was, OK but combine that with up to 200 meters out probably drawn in from a satellite and you end up with lots of holes in the maps and streets that should be joined not joined. Cross overs not linked.Sections of street without a street name. Streets incorrectly linked together and incorrectly named. Leisure=Park not Leisure=park, use of tags that are not part of the feature set on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features where a suitable tag is available. There aren't a lot of on the ground mappers in Ottawa and data quality has been an issue. There are religious problems as well, such as should we just replace all the existing roads with CANVEC data? I've seen a couple of roads that aren't in CANVEC so far but the CANVEC data quality is very good. Cheerio John On 31 July 2010 12:46, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: john whelan wrote: Currently I'm cleaning up in Ottawa, I have over 8,000 errors to clean up left and recently I've probably cleaned at least a couple of thousand errors so far. Things like incorrect street names, where I have a CANVEC source that helps enormously, connecting streets up so you can run routing software. etc. Are you seriously suggesting for each correction I do a write up saying why I or Validator think its wrong and my source for the correction? Usually, corrections can be grouped - for example, by fixing all the incorrectly joined junctions in an area first, then uploading with an appropriate changeset comment. That's a lot of errors, by the way. Have those errors been created by humans or by some import? Everything I modify was manually created by a human being, so it's a reasonable assumption that someone will be interested in my reasons for changing their work. They might even learn something from it and don't repeat the same mistakes in the future, thus I might actually be saving time that I would otherwise have spent on fixing those future errors. The situation could be somewhat different when fixing import errors, which is something I'm not familiar with. Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
Ed, I hear your point about commenting on the why not the what. I agree that the why is important. But personally I try to add the what and the where as well: 'Adjusted road positions based on GPS traces' There's your why and what already; I'd probably say adjusted road positions in 16ieme arondissement or something. It's true that this can be derived from the changeset contents/bbox but still I think it is useful (think of changesets arranged in a list view with just the numerical bbox behind it) and it costs me nothing. 'Traced buildings from aerial photo' or 'from OS map' or from whatever source you used. Again, you have the why and what already. My comment would probably read traced South Haystack buildings from aerial photo or so. - if someone renames a pub or a restaurant, it's because this person thinks that his knowledge is more recent than the previous contribution In that case perhaps no special comment is needed, though myself I'd still add a note saying 'I walked past this pub and the name has changed'. Yes, of course such a change may be contained in a larger edit which might be called fixed some names based on survey in West Brumpton. *If* you do a large and unspecific edit, e.g. you hold a mapping party and map lots of new streets, add POIs, fix existing bugs etc., then I think it is perfectly ok to just write lots of new streets fixed existing data from mapping party results in XYZ - nobody requests that you split up the changeset into atomic bits. By the way, the why, what, and where are not the only kinds of information that can be conveyed with a changeset comment. I have often seen things like: first part of mapping party results in X, rest to follow tomorrow, or casual survey of Y, further visits definitely required! - that's also valuable meta-information. Changeset comments are an excellent way to share your work with other members of the community in a number of ways. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
My favourite of the day Fair Oaks Crescent / Beechcliffe Street for a street name, its actually two streets that have been linked together, so break them apart and name them correctly. Cheerio John On 31 July 2010 12:46, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: john whelan wrote: Currently I'm cleaning up in Ottawa, I have over 8,000 errors to clean up left and recently I've probably cleaned at least a couple of thousand errors so far. Things like incorrect street names, where I have a CANVEC source that helps enormously, connecting streets up so you can run routing software. etc. Are you seriously suggesting for each correction I do a write up saying why I or Validator think its wrong and my source for the correction? Usually, corrections can be grouped - for example, by fixing all the incorrectly joined junctions in an area first, then uploading with an appropriate changeset comment. That's a lot of errors, by the way. Have those errors been created by humans or by some import? Everything I modify was manually created by a human being, so it's a reasonable assumption that someone will be interested in my reasons for changing their work. They might even learn something from it and don't repeat the same mistakes in the future, thus I might actually be saving time that I would otherwise have spent on fixing those future errors. The situation could be somewhat different when fixing import errors, which is something I'm not familiar with. Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] My Vote for most point dense part of OSM
John, impressive looking maps indeed... but: My vote for most point dense is part of Bakersfield, California: If you look at the duplicate node map then it's no surprise they are point dense - if you have two copies of each that's not hard: http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/dupe_nodes/?zoom=8lat=36.09253lon=-119.25924layers=BT Yet another import that values visual effects over data usability. One wonders why we're not just dropping JOSM Co. and use the GIMP instead for mapping. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Agreed. I think the comment should say 'why' not 'what' What does that mean? What: made a road into a dual carriageway Why: ??? I assume you don't want an explanation of my vision of my role in the universe. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Cartinus wrote: And nobody puts all Key: and Tag: pages in his wiki watchlist. Use one of the feeds (eg RSS) and it is easy. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Ed Avis wrote: Another way to look at it is that it's your own time you are saving. If another mapper has a question about your changes and they have to contact you and you need to reply, that uses a lot more time than a quick explanation attached to the change when it was uploaded. Certainly doing so takes a lot less time than posting messages on this list. Mailing people who have just mapped something which I wish to query doesn't take long. It may take a couple of weeks to get an answer - other mappers who stray into my areas of interest are travelling and may not have internet access regularly. I've not found what I want to know from the changeset comments. I want to know when the mapping happened (I may have newer knowledge) or how they actually got some information I'd not been able to obtain. The mail process improves our teamwork and gives me new hints on information gathering, or allows us to politely approach a new mapper and offer advice. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Ed Avis wrote: Liz edodd at billiau.net writes: so how do *you* summarise adding POIs and side streets and putting in maxspeed along a hundred km of highway? because i just put in the name of where i have been, that's all. I'd also mention how I found the data - spotted from the car window as I drove past, or painstakingly surveyed on foot? That can help someone else if they need to verify the exact position of some post box to the nearest metre, or whatever. So I would say 'POIs from car window driving through X' or 'mapping trip on foot to X'. (You could instead tag source=survey;survey=foot or something equally Byzantine on every single object, but nobody is pedantic enough to do that. So a short note in plain English on the changeset helps.) So are you all now putting examples on the wiki about changeset comments? To the humble mapper they would have just arrived. Some editing programmes prefill the changeset comment. One (which I have not tried) apparently does not allow any comment. If freeform text is what you want, could you file bug reports on the editors that don't make that obvious? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A plea for meaning ful changeset comments
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Agreed. I think the comment should say 'why' not 'what' What does that mean? What: made a road into a dual carriageway Why: ??? I assume you don't want an explanation of my vision of my role in the universe. Preferably not. Because I noticed it on this aerial photography. Because this source says so. Because I drove down it today. Because some vandal made it single carriageway yesterday. Because I saw it in a dream. If none of these or anything along those lines work, maybe then you could explain your role in the universe. Love that this thread is now over 9000 words on 'why I can't be bothered / haven't got time to write a few words in the comment'... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] My Vote for most point dense part of OSM
On 31/07/2010 20:43, Frederik Ramm wrote: If you look at the duplicate node map then it's no surprise they are point dense - if you have two copies of each that's not hard: My Lord, take a look at France. Any idea what happened there? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...
On 31 July 2010 10:36, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Then it doesn't help at all - what if ODbL 1.1 says that you can freely relicense to CC-Zero? And if you think that can't happen, go look at the GNU Free Documentation Licence 1.3 and Wikipedia. That kind of legal hijinks is the only reason Wikipedia can be under a CC licence now. Instead of specifying licenses and version, maybe the CTs need to explicitly state a minimal type of license, in the case of ODBL/CC-by-SA they are attribution + share alike style licenses, that would still allow updating the license if an undesirable loop hole is found, but limit changing the license to be similar in spirit. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Showgrounds
This is exactly my point and gets back to another thread from a few weeks back regarding tagging schools and the sometimes multiple uses that each building can have (ie after hours classes, church groups on a weekend etc etc). From memory I believe that discussion was resolved by tagging start/end times for particular groups and the same could be done on specific buildings/facilities within any area. I just want a consistent approach to tagging these areas that are definitely NOT used for recreation in the simple sense of sports on an oval. (there is a whole other discussion there regarding the semantics of what constitutes recreation but lets not go there). I am in two minds after considering Steve's suggestion of landuse=recreation_ground, recreation_ground=showground and my suggestion of landuse=showground to tag the extent of the area. There are pros/cons either way and perhaps (like a few other discussions on this list) that name is actually the most important piece of information ie Bendigo Showgrounds ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.7386lon=144.2714zoom=14). Craig On 30 July 2010 22:27, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Meh. I look at the definition of landuse=recreation_ground and I think it could include almost anything. Maybe you're right. There are so few showgrounds it won't matter much either way. Steve Actually there are a lot of showgrounds. Pretty much every rural town has a designated show area, and if you talk about something being held at the showgrounds, the locals all know where you mean. But most of the year, it's used for other things. Any permanent halls are often used for clubs to meet in, any weekly markets may well be held in the show grounds, etc. During the show, everything else stops. But about 50 weeks of the year, it's used for other things. Example, a local showgrounds near me has the show for about 1.5 weeks each year. But the rest of the year, it holds a market each week, several of the halls are used pretty much every night for various clubs (eg one hall has four different dance groups, indoor bowls, and a music group every week), there's a church each week in one of the other halls, several equestrian events each year in the ring, concerts sometimes, running athletic events in the grounds. It's still called the showgrounds, though. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-br] Formatação de ruas de mão inglesa
Acredito que não haja uma tag específica, uma vez que o projeto nasceu na Inglaterra e lá todas as ruas são mão inglesa :) Se quiser ser específico, creio que você possa usar a tag note=mão inglesa. []s Em 31 de julho de 2010 15:05, Rafael Gassner rafael.gass...@gmail.comescreveu: Oi Pessoal, Procurei no fórum mas não encontrei nada. Alguém sabe como é a tag para mão inglesa? Abraço -- Rafael Gustavo Gassner 55 41 9177-6267 ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
[Talk-de] place=village area Quelle
Hallo Liste, bin gerade dabei Dörfer zu mappen. Um die Orte auf der Karte besser einzugrenzen, möchte ich ein place=village area zeichnen. Luftbilder geht leider nicht. Yahoo hat eine zu schlechte Auflösung. Gibt es noch andere Quellen? Wurden nicht mal place auf der OSM Karte in größeren Zoomstufen eingeblendet? Wer kann helfen? Danke und Ciao Holger ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Konzept für die Gruppierung von ways ( ähnlich Linienbündel; Problem von drehenden ways bei =?iso-8859-1?q?_forward/backward?=)
Am 30.07.2010 um 08:17 schrieb Guenther Meyer: Am Donnerstag 29 Juli 2010, 23:44:33 schrieb steffterra: Nunja. da gehts ja um die aktuell etablierten Autobahnspuren, die bei jeder baulichen Trennung ja auch so gezeichnet werden sollten. Oder habe ich etwas übersehen? inklusive Fahrspurtagging. tagging ja - zeichnen nein. Nur die Fahrbahnen der beiden Richtungen (die je aus mind. 2 Fahrspuren bestehen können) werden einzeln gezeichnet, da es ja eine bauliche Trennung für die Fahrbahnen der beiden Richtungen gibt. Einzelne Fahrspuren einer Fahrbahn sind darin nicht umgesetzt worden, da sie nicht baulich getrennt sind. Das Prinzip möchte ich ja in meinem Modell beibehalten, nur dass dann angepassten Editoren die ways als zu einer Fahrbahn gehörig dargestellen können (durch die gleiche Hintergrundfarbe). Insofern wird zwar aufgehoben: ein way pro Fahrbahn, doch das gilt immernoch ausserhalb der gemeinsamen Hintergrundfarbe. Alte Editoren zeigen es halt wie jetzt auch an, mit den einzelnen ways pro Fahrspur, die aber nicht als baulich verbunden gezeigt werden (da die gemeinsame Hintergrundfarbe fehlt.) Ausserdem sind die ways ohne Straßenklassifizierung, weil das ja am datenway liegt. Beim Renderer ist es so: der alte Renderer zeigt nur den datenway, da dieser eine Straßenklassifizierung hat. Die Richtungsways werden gar nicht gerendert, da der highway-tag fehlt. Ein neuer Renderer erkennt aber, dass das Fahrspuren sind und zeichnet es entsprechend. Da Konzept sollte wohl auch fuer andere Strassen erweitert werden, leider kamm dann erstmal nix mehr... weil die bauliche Nicht-Trennung dagegen stand. Aber dann unterstütze nicht indirekt das den derzeit festgefahrenen Karren ;-) Indem Du sagts, dass man die wayrichtung in ruhe lassen sollte, udn dann gehe das tagging schon klar. Ich denke vielmehr, dass egal sein sollte, die Wayrichtung zu ändern. Und das wäre es bei meinem Modell. Es sind halt zwei verschiedene Ansaetze. Du haengst dich zu sehr an der Richtung auf. Ich versuche normalerweise erst mal, Probleme schnell und einfach am Ursprung zu loesen, bevor ich alles neu schreibe. Ich hänge mich nicht zu sehr an der Richtung auf, sondern ich versuche mit meinem Modell das Problem mit der Richtung zu beheben. Irgendwie musst du die Gruppierung ja in der Datenbank speichern. Das naheliegendste ist da natuerlich eine einfache Relation. Eine andere Moeglichkeit waere, die Information an den mittleren Weg zu taggen (wahrscheinlich sogar die bessere). ich dachte an eine ID die durch einen einfachen Algorithmus aus den beteiligten ways automatisch errechnet wird. Ist das bei Relationen genauso? Das hat nichts miteinander zu tun. Eine Relation ist ein Basisobjekt genau wie ein Node oder ein Way. Wie du die nutzt, steht dir im Prinzip total frei. Es geht hier nur um die technische Abbildung deiner Gruppierung bzw. ID. Ja eben, wie errechnet sich denn die ID einer Relation? Dann mache doch mal einen Vorschlag, wie das auch für Spezialfälle _dieses Modells_ incl. der Möglichkeit des Fahrspurtaggings (wo nötig/ sinnvoll), die dieses Model bietet. wie jetzt, dein Modell? Ja meines. Wie wäre mein Modell mit Relationen für alle angesprochenen Spezialfälle umsetzbar? Ich glaube, da liegt ein Verstaendnisproblem vor: Das einzige, wozu ich eine Relation benutzt haette, waere die Abbildung des Objekts Gruppe selbst. Nein ;-) Ich meinte, Du solltest bitte mal zeigen, wie Du die Spezialfälle der Gruppierung mittels Relationen darstellst. Also die Gruppierungen selbst, nicht das ganze Modell. Du sagtest ja, dass die Gruppierung ncihts anderes als eine Relation wäre. da warte ich noch auf dein versprochenes Beispiel (realisiert z.B. mit josm). Ich schau's mir an, und versuche dann mal, dasselbe auf meine Weise zu relaisieren... Da müsst Ihr Euch leider noch etwas gedulden. Aus beruflichen Gründen bin ich massiver eingespannt, als ich dachte und bin froh, diesem Thread weiter verfolgen zu können. mir geht's da leider aehnlich... Aber hey, wenn am Ende was brauchbares rauskommt, kommt's auf ein paar Tage mehr auch nicht an ;-) Sorry, muss weiter vertrösten. Aber ich stehe hinter meinem Modell und werde es hoffentlich bald mal machen können. Bis denn und danke, steffterra ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Konzept für die Gruppierung von ways ( ähnlich Linienbündel; Problem von drehenden ways bei =?iso-8859-1?q?_forward/backward?=)
Am 30.07.2010 um 08:27 schrieb Guenther Meyer: Für die Umsetzung müssen natürlich alle an einem Strang ziehen. +1 Abwärtskompatibilität bleibt ja dennoch erhalten. lassen wir uns ueberraschen. ich denke das koennte bei deinem Modell interessant werden. Man muesste mal ausprobieren, was ein heutiger Renderer aus deinem Modell machen wuerde (kann ich gerne machen, sobald was getaggtes vorliegt)... Das wäre cool. Leider habe ich dazu jetzt in der anderen mail geantwortet... :-/ wie das gerendert würde. Aber visualisiert ist es natürlich noch einfacher zu verstehen. Besonders der Richtugnsway, der nach meinem Modell keinen eigenen highway-tag hat, sollte eigentlich nicht gerendert werden, der datenway schon. Da die richtungsabhängigen Tags dann auf den ways liegen wird man diese Trennung auch bei der Software berücksichtigen müssen. Doch da helfen nur note-tags, dass das nicht zerlegt wird und stattdessen die Software das neue Modell unterstützt. (z.B. Navi-software, etc.) Letztendlich bleibt es dann doch wieder am Frontend haengen. Der User sollte nicht wissen muessen, ob er left, right, forward, backward taggen muss, oder ob er jetzt lieber ein Tag oder einen neuen way dranbasteln soll... doch woher soll das frontend wissen, wo backward usw. in der Realität ist? ist das so schwer?! ja schon. Wenn das automatisch gehen soll schon. der Editor kennt die Referenzrichtung des Weges, und kann sein backward Tag danach ausrichten und entsprechend anzeigen. Wie das in der Realitaet aussieht, weiss sowieso nur der User. Die Problem ist doch, dass der user es irgendwo eingeben muss. Und da kommt es sehr darauf an, wie die Eingabefelder beschriftet werden und wie das dann vom Editor interpretiert wird, um daraus den richtigen backward/forward/left/right-tag zu machen. Wenn man mit Himmelsrichtungen für die Straßenseite arbeitest, dann hast Du das Problem, dassw man bei schräg verlaufenden Straßen nicht weiss, ob das nun nördlich ist (wie bei einer horizontalen Straße), oder schon westlich (wie bei einer senkrechten Straße) ... verstehst Du? Da müssten dann wieder Regeln eingeführt werden, ab wieviel ° was gilt. Aber es wäre durch Regeln umsetzbar. steffterra ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] place=village area Quelle
Hierzu ein paar Links: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Gemeindegrenze http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Germany/Grenzen http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Grenze_zeichnen -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/place-village-area-Quelle-tp5357667p5357941.html Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Wiese gleich / ungleich Weide ??
Hi ! in der letzten Zeit habe ich mich ausgiebig mit der Erfassung von Landuse beschäftigt. Dabei ist mir aufgefallen das viele Grünflächen (schreibe bewußt nicht Weide oder Wiese) mit landuse = farmland definiert haben. Wenn ich jetzt im Wiki bei landuse = meadow [1] nachlese dann steht da Wiese ohne Gehölzer - mit wäre danach landuse = scrub was viele z.b. im Bereich von Autobahnauffahren verwenden. Wenn ich mir nun aber den Eintrag für landuse = farmland ansehe sind auf den Bild mehrere Gründlandflächen abgebildet und nicht als landuse = meadow [3] bezeichnet. Hier wird dann wieder von Weiden gesprochen. Ist die Wiese vielleicht nur zur Heugewinnung und es dürfen keine Kühe Co dort laufen oder wie ist das zu verstehen. Wer kann mich aufklären. Meine Auffassung ist nämlich arbeitsintensiver als die allgemeine landuse = farmland-Definition. Gruß Jan :-) [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:landuse%3Dmeadow [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dscrub [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:landuse%3Dfarm ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Wiese gleich / ungleich Weide ??
moin, Am 31.07.2010 13:28, schrieb Jan Tappenbeck: Ist die Wiese vielleicht nur zur Heugewinnung und es dürfen keine Kühe Co dort laufen oder wie ist das zu verstehen. richtig, eine Wiese wird gemäht (heute wohl mehr zur Silagegewinnung), eine Weide wird vom Vieh beweidet. VG Jörk ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Konzept für die Gruppierung von ways ( ähnlich Linienbündel; Problem von drehenden ways bei =?iso-8859-1?q?_forward/backward?=)
Am Samstag 31 Juli 2010, 09:25:54 schrieb steffterra: Beim Renderer ist es so: der alte Renderer zeigt nur den datenway, da dieser eine Straßenklassifizierung hat. Die Richtungsways werden gar nicht gerendert, da der highway-tag fehlt. wenn ich dich richtig verstehe, koennen die zusaetzlichen ways u.a. auch Rad- und Fussgaengerwege sein, getrennte Ein/Ausfaedel- und Abbiegespuren sind genau so moeglich. Bisher werden diese ueber ein Highway-Tag gekennzeichnet, willst du dieses auch verwerfen und was neues einfuehren? Ein neuer Renderer erkennt aber, dass das Fahrspuren sind und zeichnet es entsprechend. klar. Es sind halt zwei verschiedene Ansaetze. Du haengst dich zu sehr an der Richtung auf. Ich versuche normalerweise erst mal, Probleme schnell und einfach am Ursprung zu loesen, bevor ich alles neu schreibe. Ich hänge mich nicht zu sehr an der Richtung auf, dafuer erwaehnst du das Thema zu oft ;-) sondern ich versuche mit meinem Modell das Problem mit der Richtung zu beheben. das sei dir ja gegoennt. Alles weitere dazu hatte ich bereits geschrieben. Irgendwie musst du die Gruppierung ja in der Datenbank speichern. Das naheliegendste ist da natuerlich eine einfache Relation. Eine andere Moeglichkeit waere, die Information an den mittleren Weg zu taggen (wahrscheinlich sogar die bessere). ich dachte an eine ID die durch einen einfachen Algorithmus aus den beteiligten ways automatisch errechnet wird. Ist das bei Relationen genauso? Das hat nichts miteinander zu tun. Eine Relation ist ein Basisobjekt genau wie ein Node oder ein Way. Wie du die nutzt, steht dir im Prinzip total frei. Es geht hier nur um die technische Abbildung deiner Gruppierung bzw. ID. Ja eben, wie errechnet sich denn die ID einer Relation? keine Ahnung. Ich wuerde vermuten, dass die erst von der API beim comitten vergeben wird. Der lokale Editor kann ja nicht wissen, welche IDs frei sind. Dann mache doch mal einen Vorschlag, wie das auch für Spezialfälle _dieses Modells_ incl. der Möglichkeit des Fahrspurtaggings (wo nötig/ sinnvoll), die dieses Model bietet. wie jetzt, dein Modell? Ja meines. Wie wäre mein Modell mit Relationen für alle angesprochenen Spezialfälle umsetzbar? Ich glaube, da liegt ein Verstaendnisproblem vor: Das einzige, wozu ich eine Relation benutzt haette, waere die Abbildung des Objekts Gruppe selbst. Nein ;-) Ich meinte, Du solltest bitte mal zeigen, wie Du die Spezialfälle der Gruppierung mittels Relationen darstellst. Also die Gruppierungen selbst, nicht das ganze Modell. Du sagtest ja, dass die Gruppierung ncihts anderes als eine Relation wäre. im Sinne von zusammenfassen von Objekten, also in diesem Falle der Ways. Konkret: Relation XY sagt aus, dass Way 12, Way 34 und Way 56 zusammengehoeren und eine 'Gruppe' bilden. Verstaendnisproblem. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Wiese gleich / ungleich Weide ??
OT: geht's bitte auch ohne HTML? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Konzept für die Gruppierung von ways ( ähnlich Linienbündel; Problem von drehenden ways bei =?iso-8859-1?q?_forward/backward?=)
Am Samstag 31 Juli 2010, 09:38:45 schrieb steffterra: der Editor kennt die Referenzrichtung des Weges, und kann sein backward Tag danach ausrichten und entsprechend anzeigen. Wie das in der Realitaet aussieht, weiss sowieso nur der User. Die Problem ist doch, dass der user es irgendwo eingeben muss. Und da kommt es sehr darauf an, wie die Eingabefelder beschriftet werden und wie das dann vom Editor interpretiert wird, um daraus den richtigen backward/forward/left/right-tag zu machen. durch grafische Eingabe!? Der User sieht die Abbildung der Strasse, und darauf in Form eines Pfeils oder einer anderen Art der Darstellung, in welcher Richtung oder auf welcher Seite die Eigenschaft gueltig ist. Eingabefelder fuer die eigentlichen Tags zeigt man am besten gar nicht mehr an. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Landsat
Hallo, Wo ist die Verbindung von Josm zu Landsat geblieben.?? .mfg Rolf ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Wiese gleich / ungleich Weide ??
Jan Tappenbeck schrieb: Wenn ich jetzt im Wiki bei landuse = meadow [1] nachlese dann steht da Wiese ohne Gehölzer ... aber so (Wiese) auch nur in der deutschen Version Wenn ich mir nun aber den Eintrag für landuse = farmland ansehe sind auf den Bild mehrere Gründlandflächen abgebildet und nicht als landuse = meadow [3] bezeichnet. Hier wird dann wieder von Weiden gesprochen. Und Obstplantagen sind auch dabei, für die es auch orchard gibt farmland scheint generell Ackerbau und Viehzucht ohne Unterscheidung zu sein? ... was man alternativ auch detaillierter taggen könnte, wenn man wollte (orchard, meadow, ... gibt's noch mehr? Ich meine, mir wäre auch mal mehr Detaillierung untergekommen ...) Ist die Wiese vielleicht nur zur Heugewinnung und es dürfen keine Kühe Co dort laufen oder wie ist das zu verstehen. So ist's definiert. Wiese = Heu Weide = Tiere stehen drumrum mit Zaun drumrum (Schafweide samt Wanderschäfer ohne Zaun vernachlässigen wir mal ...) Gruß Mueck ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] PicLayer in Josm - Button Verschieben weg?
hike39 glaubte zu wissen: Am 28.07.2010 03:39, schrieb Florian Gross: Johann H. Addicks glaubte zu wissen: Hallo, entsinne mich, dass das Plugin Piclayer früher einmal eine Funktion hatte, um geladene Bilder nicht nur zu zoomen und zu drehen, sondern auch zu verschieben (Icon mit blauen Cursorpfeilen), siehe auch Bebilderung unter http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Piclayer/Anleitung Aktuell vermisse ich diese Funktion jedoch. Wo kann die sich versteckt haben? Oder habe ich meinen Josm vergurkt? Schau mal hier: http://omploader.org/vNTJlYQ/Bildschirmfoto-21.png Bei mir ist es die rote Fahne mit der weißen Hand. Wie bist Du an diesen Button gekommen? Das ist doch kein Bestandteil von PicLayer. Ich arbeite schon länger sehr intensiv mit diesem Tool, aber dieses ist mir noch nicht aufgefallen. Frag JOSM. Das zeigt mir das so an. Ich hab nur das plugin installiert, mehr nicht. Aber ich hatte vorher mal ein anderes Symbol, das IMO aussagekröftiger war. flo -- Raubkopien sind wie Kinderüberraschungen: Spiel (Games), Spaß (Apps) und Überraschung (Polizei) [Evrim Sen im wer-weiss-was- Experten-Chat] ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
