Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

[Nick Allen]

Hi,
I tend to think of tagging more in terms of 'who will use this?' I know
my local area extremely well, so I map it as best I can using tags that
will make sense to anyone visiting the area. When I'm away from home I
use OSM extensively to find things, and hope that the local mappers are
using a universal scheme so that it will work for me. 
I've travelled on roads in Portugal, Spain an parts of Africa which
dont have a surface such as tarmac (tarmacadam / asphalt) or concrete,
but instead have been built with a top coating similar to clay, which
is compressed and then smoothed using a grader. Particularly in
Portugal, at the time I drove on them, these 'unsurfaced' roads were so
good that they were better than the (at that time) M25 which was full
of pot-holes and difficult to drive safely on.
Although https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways is the obvious
choice to look at, I actually find that 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa explains it
better.
Regards & Happy Mapping / Surveying
Nick(Tallguy)
On Sun, 2020-12-13 at 10:08 +, Edward Bainton wrote:
> >  https://85a.uk/noverton_farm_1280x800.jpg
> >
> > It seems daft to me that the mud gets rendered but not the
> hardcore. If
> > I change the "driveway" to "track" that would be the dreaded
> tagging for
> > the renderer would it not? Generally in this part of the world
> "track"
> > means mud, rather than a roadway suitable for all vehicles.
> 
> 
> I don't know what part of the world you're in, but by my Fenland
> lights, I'd probably call that a track, not a driveway - certainly
> once it passes the farm buildings (since I see a driveway as implying
> car-worthy access to a building). 
> 
> 
> Would that solve it? Driveway as far as the farm and then track?
> 
> 
> I'm going to risk blasphemy and suggest that tagging for the renderer
> is what we all do, all day (or why map?). The problem imo is "fudging
> it for the renderer", or "outright lying for the renderer". In this
> case, I'd say track is a valid choice - I think even for the whole
> length, if by "driveway" we infer something, short, tidy, and
> suburban.
> 
> 
> But I'm still a spring chicken round here, relatively speaking, and I
> await correction by my olders.
> 
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 09:09, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB <
> talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >Getting back to this
> >  case, this is the farm drive. Beyond the
> > 
> > >cattle-grid the public
> >  bridleway continues left through the farm
> > 
> > >buildings, and the surface
> >  deteriorates to the usual farm mud:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   >https://85a.uk/noverton_farm_1280x800.jpg
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Apologies for going off topic, but I knew that name (Noverton Farm)
> > sounded familiar.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > A quick check of where it is would explain why. In 1998 I did a 
> > long distance walk from Sussex to the Peak District, following
> > ordinary footpaths (planned using OS maps) and went through this
> > area, the Teme Valley. It was very nice
> > but the footpaths were in an appaling state of disrepair, I
> > remember on several occasions that day having to scramble through
> > dense shrub cover and attempt to negotiate barbed-wire fences. I
> > seem to recall Noverton Farm as being the site of some particularly
> >  badly-maintained footpaths.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > As an aside this walk is what indirectly got me into OSM. I wanted
> > to illustrate the walk on the internet but OS licensing did not
> > permit it, which is how I started Freemap and then later got
> > involved with OSM. I still haven't illustrated this walk
> > incidentally,
> >  but...
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Would be interested to find out if the area has improved since..
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Nick
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From: Martin Wynne 
> > 
> > Sent: 12 December 2020 14:30
> > 
> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
> > 
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > On 12/12/2020 13:15, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > Ultimately, if "something needs doing", "someone" will need to do
> > it. 
> > 
> > > Perhaps that someone is you?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Andy,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yes that someone could be me. I have a server (located in
> > Columbus, 
> > 
> > Ohio) on which I am using only a fraction of the available memory
> > space 
> > 
> > and bandwidth. I have been thinking of making better use of it,
> > possibly 
> > 
> > by hosting something from OSM.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  >  I'd suggest setting up a copy of the
> > 
> >  > standard map rendering as per 
> > https://switch2osm.org/serving-tiles/
> > 
> >  > (just for Worcestershire would be fine) and start tinkering with
> > the
> > 
> >  > logic that decides what sort of service road is what, such as
> > 
> >  > 
> > 
> > 

Re: [Talk-GB] Recycling Points

[Nick Allen]

Hi Jez,

Try

amenity=recycling

Regards

Nick
Tallguy

On Thu, 26 Nov 2020, 13:08 Jez Nicholson,  wrote:

> I'm planning some work with Household Waste Recycling Centres and
> Recycling Points during the Code The City OSM hack weekend this Sat/Sun
> (which you are very welcome to join
> https://codethecity.org/what-we-do/hack-weekends/code-the-city-21-put-your-city-on-the-map/
> in any capacity you like)
>
> A Recycling Centre being the local 'tip', see
> https://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/services/bins-and-recycling/find-your-nearest-recycling-centre
>
> A Recycling Point being a cluster of recycling containers in, say, at the
> end of your local supermarket car park. Often given a name by the Council,
> see
> https://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/services/bins-and-recycling/recycling-points
>
> Am I missing something, or is there no concept of a Recycling Point in
> OSM? Have you seen/used anything else?
>
> - Jez
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] CWGC: worldwide, war graves

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I think it was some years ago, but there was a question on this
mailing list about Commonwealth War Graves, and someone in authority
replied on the list that their data was open for use - not sure how
easy it would be to search the archives for that.

Sorry, I don't remember any more info than that.

Regards

Nick

On Sat, 25 Apr 2020
19:21:13 +0200 Daniel Pocock  wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> We were discussing[1] this on talk-au recently as today is Anzac Day
> 
> I sent a request to CWGC asking if they will make their list of
> cemeteries available under either the ODbL or UK Open Government
> License (OGL v3.0)
> 
> Has anybody else had any discussion with CWGC or looked at ways to use
> their data?
> 
> They provide an easy way to download all 20,000 cemeteries as a CSV
> file.  I've put more details on https://anzacathon.com
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 1.
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2020-April/013791.html
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Soild fuel

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

The main usage that I'm aware of is to do with the waterways network in the
UK. Many narrowboats, and others,  have solid fuel stoves on board, and buy
from Chandler's or narrowboats that work the waterways supplying gas,
solid fuel and other consumables.

Mapping the mobile suppliers would be difficult, add they mover on after a
few days,  but the Chandler's,  and petrol stations that supply the boaters
could do with a consistent tagging scheme.

Nick
(Tallguy)
my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!

On Mon, 3 Feb 2020, 13:49 SK53,  wrote:

> There's one 
> fairly close to me (or at least their sign is still there, I've not
> recently verified that they still exist). We used shop=coal (but see
> below), which is not far off the more generic shop=fuel.
>
> It's over 20 years ago since I bought coal. I ordered it and was
> delivered, perhaps 1 cwt which lasted the winter. I think that's how most
> solid fuel will be sold, so most are not really shops but coal merchants
> yards. I have no idea how these should be tagged, but shop is probably not
> particularly correct. Similar things will be true for suppliers of LPG or
> Oil for heating systems in rural areas. In Spain people used to buy butane
> for cooking (probably still do) largely through Butano SA which became a
> Repsol subsidiary. I ought to know how this worked as a relative worked for
> them, but don't. I suspect it's possible to get regular deliveries (just
> like the old Corona
>  vans - fizzy pop
> I hasten to add).
>
> Jerry
>
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 21:28, Andy Robinson  wrote:
>
>> Solid fuel; as in a coal merchants. Yes, still a few of those around,
>> probably many of them in some countries.
>>
>> amenity=fuel / fuel=solid perhaps but that will receive a petrol pump on
>> the map for your efforts.
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7171642306
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Andy
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[Nick Allen]

Hi,
Yes, but the way it is currently mapped is the way I would chose, and
have utilised on many roundabouts for public transport &  cycle
routes. 
Has something changed? If so I wasn't aware?
Regards
NickTallguy
On Mon, 2019-12-23 at 18:28 +, David Woolley wrote:
> On 23/12/2019 18:15, Nick Allen wrote:
> I may be missing something here, but 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099 looks okay to me.
> 
> 
> The OP was proposing that <
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099>, <
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757674481>, and <
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757543147 should be merged into a,
> single, closed loop.
> ___Talk-GB mailing
> listtalk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I may be missing something here, but 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099 looks okay to me. 

The wiki at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Public_transport_routes
 didn't give me any clues either.

Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On Mon, 2019-12-23 at 14:08 +1100, Warin wrote:
> I'm looking at Wivenhoe B1028 way 477263099.
> This is a segment of a roundabout.
> 
> Would it not be better for the way to be a single feature in OSM?
> 
> I think the route relations now handle roundabouts so there should be no 
> problem there.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: OSMTracker for Android - detailed survey of paths & tracks layout

[Nick Allen]

Hi,
I've added a set of buttons into the layout which should assist in
making notes if you come across a building with solar panels whilst
surveying. The buttons are * Roof_PV-L if the building with panels is
on your left as survey,* Roof-PV-R
*   PV_315-44
* PV_225-314,   PV_45-134,
*   PV_135-224
As you move, OSMTracker displays your direction of travel, in degrees
(North is 0 or 360) .
My suggestion is that you touch a button to indicate if you have seen
panels on your left or right, and then touch a button to indicate which
way the panel is facing (most, but not all, are facing South). If you
want to further refine this, touch two buttons to indicate to yourself
when editing that the panels were facing, for instance South East.
Obviously not as good for volume updates, but it all helps.
At the moment the set is available using the settings for my
repository;
Github username = Nick-TallguyRepository Name = osmtracker-android-
layoutsBranch name = detailed-tracks
Any problems or suggestions, please get back to me.
I've submitted a pull request for the set to be included within the
standard list as I think they are now complete, but I'm always open to
suggestions.
Regards
NickOSM = Tallguy
On Sun, 2019-08-18 at 20:33 +0100, Nick Allen wrote:
> Hi - for Mark and anyone else who was having problems with the
> displayed icons.
> 
> I've created another layout set, this time with icons 300 pixels in
> size - previous set had 500px. This set is visible when you carry out
> the search for layouts from the app (settings / button presets /
> green cross top right). Having tried it on my phone I think it
> displays better than the original 500px set, and it will probably be
> the set that I go with when I set as standard.
> 
> If possible I'd like to end up with only one icon size and one set
> published, otherwise I'm in danger of making a mistake and having
> slightly different buttons on each - but if there is a reason for
> more than one set, I'll do my best.
> 
> Please get back to me Mark, and anyone else having problems with the
> icon size - I'm no programmer, but I do have a couple of things more
> that I could try that might help.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Nick 
> OSM = Tallguy
> 
> & Rob - I'd been using the old deprecated version for years, and only
> stumbled across the new version by accident - it seems very strange
> to have the two.
> 
> 
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Rob Nickerson 
> Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 23:33
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSMTracker for Android - detailed survey of
> paths & tracks layout
> To: Andy Townsend 
> Cc: Talk-GB 
> 
> 
> Sure I get that from a code point of view, although I was surprised
> Google allowed 2 almost identical versions (name and logo) on the
> store. Personally I was coming from a marketing and user friendliness
> point of view. It's confusing for users and will probably cost the
> new developer time in the long run as he/she will probably get some
> issues raised on GitHub that relate to the "other" OSM Tracker. 
> 
> Would have thought a rebrand would have been useful if no way to get
> the old app down. Likewise I would have thought a few minutes to make
> the app look more maintained on the OSM wiki (e.g. update
> screenshots, removal of PDA survey) would of been a help to attract
> new users.
> 
> Anyway, not an issue for me (as I don't use it) so I won't loose any
> sleep over this one. Certainly not "upset" just confused by the
> situation.
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 12:45, Andy Townsend 
> wrote:
> >  > Why on earth are there 2 versions of OSMTracker for Android on
> > the Play store?! 
> > 
> > It's open source software, so it's fairly technically
> > straightforward to "clone, modify and resubmit".  What restrictions
> > Google put on this sort of thing currently I don't know, but I
> > suspect they're mostly limited to an API usage check and a " dodgy
> > code behaviour" check (that'd be the case for an Enterprise Play
> > Store submission).
> > 
> > > Which is the right one and how to get an old one removed?
> >
> >
> >  
> > Maybe there isn't one "right one" ?  My recollection was that there
> > was a problem with OSM-hosted tile usage in one of the versions
> > (which may have been since resolved) and there was a bit of a delay
> > getting it fxed.  Perhaps someone fixed it in "another" version in
> > the meantime?
> > 
> > Whatever it is

[Talk-GB] Fwd: OSMTracker for Android - detailed survey of paths & tracks layout

[Nick Allen]

Hi - for Mark and anyone else who was having problems with the displayed
icons.

I've created another layout set, this time with icons 300 pixels in size -
previous set had 500px. This set is visible when you carry out the search
for layouts from the app (settings / button presets / green cross top
right). Having tried it on my phone I think it displays better than the
original 500px set, and it will probably be the set that I go with when I
set as standard.

If possible I'd like to end up with only one icon size and one set
published, otherwise I'm in danger of making a mistake and having slightly
different buttons on each - but if there is a reason for more than one set,
I'll do my best.

Please get back to me Mark, and anyone else having problems with the icon
size - I'm no programmer, but I do have a couple of things more that I
could try that might help.

Regards

Nick
OSM = Tallguy

& Rob - I'd been using the old deprecated version for years, and only
stumbled across the new version by accident - it seems very strange to have
the two.


-- Forwarded message -
From: Rob Nickerson 
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 23:33
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSMTracker for Android - detailed survey of paths &
tracks layout
To: Andy Townsend 
Cc: Talk-GB 


Sure I get that from a code point of view, although I was surprised Google
allowed 2 almost identical versions (name and logo) on the store.
Personally I was coming from a marketing and user friendliness point of
view. It's confusing for users and will probably cost the new developer
time in the long run as he/she will probably get some issues raised on
GitHub that relate to the "other" OSM Tracker.

Would have thought a rebrand would have been useful if no way to get the
old app down. Likewise I would have thought a few minutes to make the app
look more maintained on the OSM wiki (e.g. update screenshots, removal of
PDA survey) would of been a help to attract new users.

Anyway, not an issue for me (as I don't use it) so I won't loose any sleep
over this one. Certainly not "upset" just confused by the situation.

*Rob*


On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 12:45, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> > Why on earth are there 2 versions of OSMTracker for Android on the Play
> store?!
>
> It's open source software, so it's fairly technically straightforward to
> "clone, modify and resubmit".  What restrictions Google put on this sort of
> thing currently I don't know, but I suspect they're mostly limited to an
> API usage check and a " dodgy code behaviour" check (that'd be the case for
> an Enterprise Play Store submission).
>
> > Which is the right one and how to get an old one removed?
>
> Maybe there isn't one "right one" ?  My recollection was that there was a
> problem with OSM-hosted tile usage in one of the versions (which may have
> been since resolved) and there was a bit of a delay getting it fxed.
> Perhaps someone fixed it in "another" version in the meantime?
>
> Whatever it is, I'd suggest that the best place to ask the question would
> be to the relevant app authors via the Play Store support link, or github
> (at least one of them has a public issues list there).
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
> ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] OSMTracker for Android - detailed survey of paths & tracks layout

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I've started to create a detailed layout for use in OSMTracker for Android,
which hopefully will help in surveying paths and tracks, and subsequently
updating OSM. It's slightly different to the original layout within the
app, and it has buttons for UK designations, access restrictions,
smoothness, surface, and a few other features which I think will help.

In order to use this layout, you will need to install OSMTracker for
Android (there are 2 versions of OSMTracker, so make sure you have the
correct one. Once installed, go to settings, Button Presets, and click on
the green cross top right, then click on the spanner symbol. Tick Custom,
and;
Github username = Nick-Tallguy
Repository name = osmtracker-android-layouts
Branch name = master

Click save, and you should have the option to click on a number of
different layouts created by other contributors, and WALK RIDE DETAILED.
Click this, and a brief message will appear explaining its use - if you're
happy, click download, and make your way back to the start screen, making
sure to put a tick in 'walk ride detailed'. When you next start a new track
you will see this layout. You can change between layouts whilst tracking if
you wish. Don't forget to make a note of any PROW reference that may be
displayed.

I'd appreciate feedback on the layout - are there any buttons / labels you
would like adding (not too many - it may be better to create a new layout)?

Any problems, please get back to me. The layout is 'work in progress' and I
expect to alter it as a result of feedback.

There are more detailed guides at;
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSMTracker_(Android)
https://github.com/labexp/osmtracker-android/wiki
and https://learnosm.org/en/mobile-mapping/osmtracker/ (this one's now a
little out of date and refers to the other version of OSMTracker).

To find a PROW that needs a survey, take a look at
https://osm.mathmos.net/survey/ and make sure you have a tick in 'Public
Rights of Way'.

Regards

Nick
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] National Trust talk - leaflet

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

Many thanks to the team from OSMUK who set up the talks at the recent
AGM - I thoroughly enjoyed them & hope to contribute more on the
subjects.

I have one slight problem - I've lost my copy of the National Trust
handout of tags, and am hopeful that some kind soul will scan their
copy and send it to me.

Thanks in anticipation

Nick
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Is this a footbridge?

[Nick Allen]

Hi,
The scale is on the bottom left of the window - the length of line
varies according to the amount of zoom you use. It's there on the main
OSM website when you are viewing as well. Very easy to miss.
Regards
Nick(Tallguy)
On Sun, 2019-05-05 at 18:18 +0100, Martin Wynne wrote:
> On 05/05/2019 17:39, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
> Given the small width of the ditch, I wouldn't bother with the
> separate way, but just put the ford & handrail tags on the
> intersecting node.
> The way you've mapped it the ford & handrail are 5 metres in length.
> Thanks Dave.
> I have shortened it to about 2 metres (I think).
> I'm reluctant to remove the separate way. In this case the stream is
> very narrow, but in other cases it often isn't. A bridge has a finite
> span length, a culvert has a finite length, and a ford surely has a
> length too? If the stream was mapped as water between separate banks,
> it would look a bit daft to have only a single node in the centre
> tagged as a ford.
> p.s. Am I missing something? How can I see the actual dimensions of
> an element in the iD editor?
> cheers,
> Martin.
> ___Talk-GB mailing
> listtalk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

[Nick Allen]

Brian,

Sounds like a good idea.

Nick
(Tallguy)

On Thu, 2019-04-04 at 09:38 +0100, Brian Prangle wrote:
> Hi everyone
> 
> Back in the day of the original NapPTAN import we imported pay scale
> areas - tagged as public_transport=pay_scale_area. I don't know why
> we ever did this - there's no evidence on the ground and it's highly
> unlikely that any OSM data consumer makes use of them ( if indeed
> they are still current). The information is better in
> public_transport applications run by public transport bodies
> 
> So I'm proposing that they are all deleted
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> 
> ___Talk-GB mailing
> listtalk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-london] bulk importing london open data to osm

[Nick Allen]

Hi Joe,

Just in case you were wondering if Tom was the only one here.

Welcome, and I look forward to seeing progress.

I think Tom made a very good job of answering you, so I won't interfere and
confuse things.

Regards

Nick (Tallguy)

Nick & Daphne
my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019, 13:19 Joseph Leach,  wrote:

> attending the meetup sounds like a very good idea
>
>
> on the bus stop example, corporate data releases can have
> inaccuracies ... at this point i should note that i copied a drinking
> fountain  dataset to sixteen
> amenities  (and added metadata to one in
> bexleyheath), looking back, adding notes rather than features may have
> been better in relation to the need for surveys
>
>
> will now go and check the guys hospital one
>  during lunch
> --
> *From:* Tom Chance 
> *Sent:* 14 March 2019 12:12:47
> *To:* Joseph Leach
> *Cc:* talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-gb-london] bulk importing london open data to osm
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> There's further useful guidance on the wiki, inc on the licensing point:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
>
> There's also a regular pub meet-up where you'll find people more up to
> date and knowledgeable than me! The next is on Thurs 28th:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/London
>
> One thing they might have thoughts on is how to involve the wider OSM
> London community, for example in checking and cleaning data that can be
> imported, or manually adding data. I recall one import many years ago of
> TfL bus stop data, where we then had to go through removing lots of
> duplicates, and quite often we found that the TfL data was less accurate
> than existing OSM data! So it was worth checking each one with a survey.
>
> Tom
>
> m: 07866 447 075
> w: http://tomchance.org
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 15:16, Joseph Leach 
> wrote:
>
> thanks, this is encouraging
>
>
> in relation to charging stations this has already raised questions:
>
>
>
>- the data is sourced via various providers, so licensing will
>likely require several parties to be involved
>- the data includes an attribute relating to taxi/public use which could
>raise issues relating to access
>- the data contains likely duplicates of stations already on osm; looking
>at both tfl and osm data together
>
> 
>  likely
>duplicates can be seen for example along Southwark Street SE1, we can use
>gis to investigate stations based on proximity to those already mapped
>
>
> presumably these questions affect all kinds of open data release, so it
> will be good to get used to dealing with such matters
>
>
> joe
> --
> *From:* Tom Chance 
> *Sent:* 13 March 2019 08:48:51
> *To:* Joseph Leach
> *Cc:* talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-gb-london] bulk importing london open data to osm
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> This would be great. Welcome to the list. I used to work at the GLA
> (2009-16) and am glad to see you proposing this.
>
> Others will have a better idea of the process, but I'd think a first step
> would be to create a wiki page and set out the datasets you have,
> indicating for each one any licensing conditions/issues, what fields you'd
> import and a check on the current data already existing.
>
> On the latter point, for example, there are already quite a few charging
> stations mapped (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GVx) and we wouldn't want to
> duplicate those with your import. You can either go through them one by
> one, deleting duplicates from your dataset before importing (or merging
> data to add new fields), or stick the dataset up and invite people to
> manually check and copy across each charging station.
>
> Tom
>
>
> m: 07866 447 075
> w: http://tomchance.org
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 22:51, Joseph Leach 
> wrote:
>
> hello
>
>
> import guidelines
> 
>  state
> that community buy-in is a pre-requisite for osm bulk data import and as
> part of the gis team at london city hall i would like to seek community
> backing for open data releases
>
>
> as a trial run, i am manually adding eighteen newly founded drinking water
> amenities, but for larger datasets would like to investigate the
> feasibility of bulk imports, for example charging stations
>
>
> joe
>
>
> GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY NOTICE:
> The information in this email may contain confidential or privileged
> materials. For more information see
> https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/email-notice/
> ___
> Talk-gb-london mailing list
> Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london
>
>

Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 147, Issue 6

[Nick Allen]

Hi All,
When using iD you can stop it 'snapping' to a nearby feature by holding
down the 'Alt' key whilst drawing the feature. 
This wiki list may help with some of the other shortcuts - possibly D
will help with shared nodes (not sure on that one, I've never used it):
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ID/Shortcuts
Regards
Nick (Tallguy)
On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 11:55 +, Edward Bainton wrote:
> As a new mapper around just long enough to know that I've made some
> crass newbie mistakes already, I agree with Andy. The iD editor is
> the the go-to editor for newbies, myself included, and the snap
> feature is so apparent in the UX that I have regularly taken its
> steer and made new objects follow old nodes.
> Presumably it would be possible to have some 'sticky' features that
> aren't so easily modified - these boundaries would seem to be a good
> candidate; so would roads when they've been rigorously established
> from multiple data sources.
> 
> And/or perhaps a warning in iD that flags the pros and cons of
> snapping to existing nodes, and/or gives the option of a bulk-
> undo/bulk-disconnect if you've done that and thought better of it.
> 
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 11:39, 
> wrote:
> > Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to
> > 
> > talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > 
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> > 
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > 
> > talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > 
> > talk-gb-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > 
> > than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..."
> > 
> > Today's Topics:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >1. OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political wards and related
> > 
> >   boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data (Rick Bowlby)
> > 
> >2. Re: OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political wards and related
> > 
> >   boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data (Colin Smale)
> > 
> >3. Re: OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political wards and related
> > 
> >   boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data (ael)
> > 
> >4. Re: OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political wards and related
> > 
> >   boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data (Mark Goodge)
> > 
> >5. Re: OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political wards and   
> >  related
> > 
> >   boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data (Andy G Wood)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- Forwarded message --
> > From: Rick Bowlby 
> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> > Cc: 
> > Bcc: 
> > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:10:24 +
> > Subject: [Talk-GB] OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political wards
> > and related boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data
> > Hello, I quite recently imported Ordnance Survey Boundary-Line data
> > (October 2018, OGL v3) for recently changed electoral wards in
> > Manchester (changeset 65101926). I hope this isn't controversial -
> > these boundaries are useful to me and potentially others as well,
> > and I understand that the OGL is compatible with OSM.
> > 
> > But I've now noticed that the 
> > outer boundary of the wards is not coincident with the current
> > administrative boundary for Manchester City Council in OSM
> > (relation 146656) - as far as I can see, the discrepancies are up
> > to about 5m or so. However it is consistent with the city boundary
> > in the same OS dataset. The sources for the existing OSM data seem
> > to be mixed - there are references to Ordnance Survey sources
> > (without dates), in some places the boundary ways are rivers, there
> > are also references to the "historic course" of a river and so on.
> > 
> > So I'm a bit out of my depth here. As things stand in the OSM data,
> > there are slivers of land all around the periphery which are in
> > Manchester but not in any ward in Manchester, or vice versa, which
> > can't be right. Plus there are data in OSM which are labeled as
> > sourced from OS Boundary-Line but which are not consistent with the
> > latest data from that source. The problem is that there are
> > numerous boundary relations sharing nodes (neighbouring
> > authorities, counties, "historic counties" etc) and cleaning all
> > this up - even if I was confident about where or whether the latest
> > OS data has priority - would be quite tricky, not to say time
> > consuming.
> > 
> > So would it be best to leave things as they are, inconsistencies
> > and all?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- Forwarded message --
> > From: Colin Smale 
> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> > Cc: 
> > Bcc: 
> > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 22:05:51 +0100
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OS Boundary-Line - Manchester political
> > wards and related boundaries, dealing with inconsistent data
> > 
> > Hi Rick,
> > As you can probably guess the 

Re: [Talk-GB] New editors working on parks

[Nick Allen]

Hi Andy,

I update http://learnosm.org/en/  and I'm seeing many searches on the site
concerning pokemon go.

Also, some visitors are from
https://www.reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/5q4ctl/warning_players_of_pok%C3%A9mon_go_may_be_editing_osm/
& other sections on reddit.

Maybe connected?

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 27 Jan 2017 16:04, "Andy Robinson"  wrote:

> There has been a large number of new editors in the wider midlands over the
> last few days (32 since Monday) most of which have been adding new or
> adding
> to exiting park areas. Some are fine first edits (a little awkward in
> placed
> but not unreasonable) but others are not, so if it's also happening in your
> area keep a close eye. I'm reverting those in my watch rectangle that are
> obviously inappropriate and I, along with I note some others, have added
> some changeset comments to try and make contact where appropriate, though
> thus far no responses.
>
> Mostly these seem to be id edits so I'm guessing perhaps a University
> course
> or something.
>
> Cheers
> Andy
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Cannot create pages on OSM Wiki

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I had a similar problem elsewhere.  Using a different browser worked for
me.

Good luck

Nick (OSM=Tallguy)
my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!

On 28 Jun 2016 10:44, "Paul Berry"  wrote:

> When attempting to add the content of a new page, there's a verification
> step...
>
> "To protect the wiki against automated page creation, we kindly ask you to
>> type the two words you see in the box below"
>
>
> ...but the alluded-to box is not shown, so additions are impossible.
>
> Any advice on how to resolve this would be useful.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards,
> *Paul*
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] HOT in the UK

[Nick Allen]

Hi Paul,

Although it's registered in the US, we're scattered all over the world.

The mailing list for HOT is at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Mapathons are starting to take place all over the UK, and the best place 
to check what is coming up soon is at http://www.missingmaps.org/ or on 
the Event Calendar here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Main_Page. 
The most frequent sessions seem to be in London but there have been many 
in other places including Exeter and Portsmouth.


It's actually me who's been recently involved in updating LearnOSM, 
specifically the http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/ sections, so I 
hope I don't put too much of an accent on it! At least one other member 
of the HOT training working group is in the UK, and there are many 
others who contribute to HOT from the UK, but it's quite often difficult 
to work out where someone actually is.


I've set up a very small group that I've trained, and we try to meet 
twice a week in Swanley, Kent 
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/51.3953/0.1723) and if you're ever 
in this neck of the woods, you would be most welcome.


If I can help with anything else, please get in touch.

Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 15/05/15 10:02, Wittle, Paul wrote:


Hello,

I've subscribed to this message list because I'm looking around to see 
if there is any organised UK group which deals with HOT projects. I 
believe this is a US based NGO setup to coordinate the use of OSM for 
disaster relief efforts after major events such as the recent 
earthquakes in Nepal.


Whilst I'd love to be doing OSM edits in my spare time I've been 
struggling to find time to get involved with job changes and children 
over the past 5 years or so. I would very much like to get involved 
with mapping for disaster recovery and my current employer permits us 
to take time off work for voluntary causes. I suspect they would 
approve of my doing a day to help the disaster recovery processes and 
it seems that HOT is the international group which organises that 
effort on OSM. In order to do this I need be able to explain to my 
employer what I would be doing and who I would be doing it for.


I wondered if there is a formal group for HOT in the UK and if anyone 
runs UK based training following the http://learnosm.org material 
setup by HOT?


Best Regards,

Paul Wittle

This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may 
contain information about individuals or other sensitive information 
and should be handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee 
(or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or 
use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this email 
in error, kindly disregard the content of the message and notify the 
sender immediately. Please be aware that all email may be subject to 
recording and/or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.



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



--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] iD users - selecting issue

[Nick Allen]

Hi Mike,

Single click is working for me on Firefox

Regards

Nick

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website  Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)

On 16 February 2015 at 22:53, Pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Hi all,

 Any iD editor users finding an issue where things can't be selected by
 simply clicking on them (as normal) but that they re quire a double-click
 which also triggers a zoom-in ?
 Closing the browser (in my case, Chrome) and reopening it restores
 normality.

 --
 Mike.
 @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction -
 For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
 via *the area's premier website - *

 *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family,
 property  pets*

 TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail

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


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

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap ten years on, and why it's time for a fresh slate

[Nick Allen]

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website  Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
-- Forwarded message --
From: nick.allen...@gmail.com
Date: 28 Oct 2014 04:27
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap ten years on, and why it's
time for a fresh slate
To: Tim Saunders tim_s...@hotmail.com
Cc:

I'd like to see something similar as well.

I've started adding a survey date tag, especially to shops that seem to
need a check every so often.  Two things that could then be of use;
1. A map render that colour coded shops according to the time since last
survey (red if over 2 years?)
2. A phone friendly simple list of the tags applied to a shop.

At the moment I take a field paper print of a row of shops with me when I
re-survey, but this only gives me an icon on the map for some. I end up
taking pages of notes which I compare with the existing tags when I get
home. Photos of the opening hour displayed helps but it would be good if I
could take something with me, either on the phone or as a printed sheet, so
I could quickly compare and only make notes of any alterations.

Are there any Genii's still in existence?

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website  Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
On 27 Oct 2014 21:53, Tim Saunders tim_s...@hotmail.com wrote:

What would suit me is an Android app that allowed me to see what needs to
be fixed in a particular area, so that I could check some things out if I
had a spare half hour in the area…..so Notes, FixMes, Musical Chairs, OSM
Inspector and other GB specific stuff (e.g. post boxes, cycle routes, land
registry addresses as examples I recall being discussed in this group).  Is
there anywhere that these are all pulled together, even in a non-mobile
friendly way?  As OSM coverage improves, I would suggest that there is more
opportunity to fix things not mapped correctly than map things not mapped
at all (although in my experience one leads to another anyway) and seeing
something that is wrong is often more of a spur to get involved than
something that is missing altogether.



*From:* Nick Whitelegg [mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk]
*Sent:* 25 October 2014 20:40
*To:* Richard Fairhurst
*Cc:* t...@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap ten years on, and why
it's time for a fresh slate



I can recite a few of them. We have very little mobile presence, even
though smartphones are ideal surveying devices; a 5% intervention here
would bring so many more people to our 95%.



Interesting points. I'd hope most of us, though, remain idealistic beyond
our 20s and don't turn into some sort of technophobic Farage-loving bore.
;-)



Regarding your point here, I've always wondered (and I think I mentioned
this some time ago) whether there would be room for an easy footpaths
editor (sorry to go on about footpaths but it's my pet OSM thing). The
user simply records their GPS trace on their phone via a custom app, and
selects, via a simple dropdown etc, the current right-of-way type
(footpath, bridleway etc). The trace is simplified (e.g. Douglas-Peucker)
and converted directly to an OSM file (I think this is what I did way back
with osmeditor... anyone remember that?)



When back home the data is uploaded. This could be done in a number of ways
e.g. OSM data could be downloaded and then some sort of algorithm applied
to detect which part of the trace is new. Those segments which are new are
then joined - initially automatically but with option to change - to
existing data and then uploaded to the server. Alternatively, one could
throw some OSM data at the server and have the server figure out which
parts are new and which are not - though that would of course involve an
extension to the API.



Is this something that could be of interest? (cc to talk-gb as it's
slightly UK-centric but could be used elsewhere potentially)



Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM on Traveline website

[Nick Allen]

Stuart,

Nice to see it being used, and credited.  I shall look forward to using 
it more often.


Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 15/09/14 15:53, Stuart Reynolds wrote:


Jerry,

Many thanks for your compliments - we’ve worked hard to integrate the 
OSM data into our routing algorithms. Some things are still causing us 
the odd problem, but on the whole we’ve been very pleased and it is a 
step change in quality from the old Navteq data.


I don’t know which website you have been using, but traveline is 
regional and not all of the regions are using the same GIS or system 
supplier. The regions currently using OSM are East  West Midlands, 
South West, East Anglia and South East. All use the same data set, 
which covers the whole of Great Britain, but with slightly differing 
interfaces.


I was going to send this just to you, but thought that others might 
like to see the reply re: the PDF maps. We know that they don’t look 
especially good at the moment, and that is an area that we have yet to 
fully re-configure. The colours/displays and what features are shown 
is not entirely as we want them to be. That’s one task that is down to 
me to do shortly!


There are other aspects of your email that I wanted to comment on, but 
those I WILL email direct, as they are all to do with the system and 
timetable data, and nothing at all to do OSM.


Regards,

Stuart Reynolds

For traveline south east  anglia

*From:*SK53 [mailto:sk53@gmail.com]
*Sent:* 15 September 2014 3:00 PM
*To:* Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* [Talk-GB] OSM on Traveline website

Over the weekend I made a fair bit of use of the traveline website for 
planning journeys in the Greater Manchester and Sheffield areas.


Something which was relatively new to me was OSM maps appearing under 
the local map button. These show pedestrian routes between various 
public transport modes, and can be saved as PDFs 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/e0t9hvn9gkqajj3/uk_5416EC7B8.pdf?dl=0 
(although I don't find the PDF's as readable as the on-line versions 
which use 'traditional' Mapnik style with a very clear overlay of bus 
stops and routing info).


As one of my destinations was best reached by a number of different 
buses with very different routes, the provision of walking routes 
through parks  a nature reserve. In fact I wished I'd used this 
facility more as it would have meant I'd have caught an earlier bus in 
Sheffield: and I could have stored some of the PDF plans on the phone 
to double check exactly where the bus stops where situated. (I may 
have also been properly alerted that the tram network in Manchester 
was shut down on Saturday).


All-in-all its a very useful improvement to the Traveline site, and I 
felt a great deal of satisfaction that it was OSM data delivered 
through a 3rd party site. Although I've been aware of traveline's 
activity with OSM, I'd no idea that I'd find it so useful.


Many thanks,

Jerry



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



--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website  Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
mailto:treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN (stop) import

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I would not wish to see a mass import in my area, but I could see some 
merit in comparing data 'line by line'. I can remember that in the early 
days (2009?) there were bus stops on the data at the time that NaPTAN 
was imported. Some were sensibly merged, but some were deleted before 
the value of merging was realised (I was probably as ignorant of how to 
sort it out properly in those days, as anyone else, so I don't think a 
witch hunt will help).


Since then, I've made many cycle surveys in my area, and have updated 
NaPTAN stops to the extent that anything I have edited in the past is 
now in the right place  the tags will be correct. However, some of the 
imported data was so inaccurate, that it was difficult to tell whether 
it should be moved North, South East or West, to where the nearest 
actual stop was. As a result of this, it is quite possible that there 
are stops shown in the right place with the correct tags concerning 
shelters, benches, tactile paving, name of stop, timetables or bus route 
references displayed, etc, but added to a NaPTAN reference which new 
data would show to actually be elsewhere.


The only way of improving this would be a line by line comparison, with 
perhaps the transfer of a reference from new NaPTAN data, to the 
existing OSM data. If I appear in the history of the bus stop (Ctrl+h 
using JOSM), then there is a bus stop in that exact location. I suspect 
that this is true of many stops elsewhere, so some cautionary line by 
line merging is going to be needed.


I use the NOVAM - viewer from http://b3e.net/novam/ to check what needs 
doing, (Birmingham colour scheme suits my purpose). If you use this  
zoom into Swanley, Kent (just off J3 of M25), you will find there are 
several stops which I have created, for which there is no NaPTAN data in 
the current database. It would obviously be sensible to add that data if 
you have it - just don't move the stop or change the other tags I've 
added please. You'll also see that I have marked some bus stops as 'not 
physically present'..


I think most mappers have worked from 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Surveying_and_Merging_NaPTAN_and_OSM_data 
(history shows this was last updated in 2011 with most of the updates 
from 2009), but there are more recent articles at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_Transport, and I'm not sure of 
what the current position is as the 'goal posts kept moving!'


Some sensible consultation aiming towards a goal we can understand and 
achieve would be good, because I personally just reached the stage where 
I made sure the bus stops were in the correct place with the right tags, 
and left the routes part completed.


I can't offer to spend time importing on a line by line basis - I'm 
currently trying to get Ebola areas mapped in Africa! If I can help in 
other ways, let me know - it makes sense to me to present the data in a 
way it can actually be used by someone!


Regards

Nick (Tallguy)

On 31/07/14 15:47, Chris Hill wrote:
The NaPTAN data was imported for Hull and East Yorkshire at my 
request. I quickly realised that the data was of variable quality and 
resurveyed the ~1300 bus stops in Hull. Having corrected a large 
percentage of the stops, I informed the Hull council team, at their 
request, who then ignored me. I would not want any NaPTAN data 
re-imported in this area unless I was sure the quality has very 
substantially improved. Some working relationship with the council 
team who maintain the data would help too.


Cheers, Chris,
osm user: chillly

On 31 July 2014 15:15:18 GMT+01:00, Stuart Reynolds 
stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk wrote:


Hi,

This is a spin off from the recent thread about imports, because I
wanted to specifically talk about NaPTAN imports.

Having briefly scanned the various wiki pages, I get the
impression that the NaPTAN data was imported, once, in 2009. What
I can’t see, or haven’t found, is any discussion about how  how
often this data is updated. NaPTAN (and associated NPTG) is a live
data set, and is changing continually as bus stops are brought
into use (e.g. new developments) and taken out of service.

As I think I have mentioned, one of the reasons that I am now on
this group is because of the adoption of OSM by a number of
traveline regions, whose members are the very local authorities
that create and maintain the NaPTAN data (including
Nottingham/Nottinghamshire, since that was mentioned in the
earlier thread). We therefore have an interest in making sure that
the stop data on OSM is as up to date as the mapping.

Is there an appetite within the community to maintain and update
this data? And if so, how would we go about it, and how often
might it be updated? For the record, the data set is change dated,
and deleted records are retained in the data for reference until
(eventually) being archived (although even then the stops 

Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN (stop) import

[Nick Allen]

Stuart,

If you would like to start in Swanley, that would be fine with me. I 
don't know about my neighbouring mappers, but I certainly use tools to 
check what edits are taking place in areas I have an interest. I 
strongly suggest you keep the area small, and use my area as a guinea 
pig, perhaps detailing what your aim is on a wiki page.


As you've gathered 'mass imports' are something we all dread as we've 
put so much time  effort into producing something useful, and we don't 
want to see it trampled.


If you've got the route data available to you, you'll probably find that 
most of the 'not physically present' relate to the route now going 
elsewhere, which is why I've got bus stops elsewhere without NaPTAN 
data. It does get more complicated as I have two or more authorities 
involved.


It's good to talk - I'll let you know if I'm unhappy  you're welcome to 
contact me if you have a query.


Regards  Good luck.

Nick (Tallguy)

On 31/07/14 17:41, Stuart Reynolds wrote:

Many thanks - some interesting viewpoints there.

I think it is safe to say that things will have improved from 2009, 
but also fair to admit that some data is not structured in the way 
that even I would like. Yorkshire is a particular problem for us. The 
good thing though is that NaPTAN is downloadable on an authority by 
authority basis and so we have scope for working through issues 
relatively local basis and perhaps later picking off authorities for 
individual auto updates once we've all agreed what that entails.


On specifics, it is never going to be the case that NaPTAN will come 
from OSM. However, I'm keen to identify mismatches - missing stops in 
Swanley might be TfL infrastructure for example, while stop not 
present might represent custom and practice stops or virtual points 
on a hail and ride route. Where we can, we can update data.


Looking to the future I am also keen to use OSM for those things that 
NaPTAN doesn't describe or which there is little will to populate. But 
that is a whole new discussion for another time.


Would anyone who has made edits like to volunteer an area for me to 
start with? I live in Southend, and have direct contact with SE 
authorities and indirect contact with SW, EM and EA.


Regards
Stuart


On 31 Jul 2014, at 17:02, Nick Allen nick.allen...@gmail.com 
mailto:nick.allen...@gmail.com wrote:



Hi,

I would not wish to see a mass import in my area, but I could see 
some merit in comparing data 'line by line'. I can remember that in 
the early days (2009?) there were bus stops on the data at the time 
that NaPTAN was imported. Some were sensibly merged, but some were 
deleted before the value of merging was realised (I was probably as 
ignorant of how to sort it out properly in those days, as anyone 
else, so I don't think a witch hunt will help).


Since then, I've made many cycle surveys in my area, and have updated 
NaPTAN stops to the extent that anything I have edited in the past is 
now in the right place  the tags will be correct. However, some of 
the imported data was so inaccurate, that it was difficult to tell 
whether it should be moved North, South East or West, to where the 
nearest actual stop was. As a result of this, it is quite possible 
that there are stops shown in the right place with the correct tags 
concerning shelters, benches, tactile paving, name of stop, 
timetables or bus route references displayed, etc, but added to a 
NaPTAN reference which new data would show to actually be elsewhere.


The only way of improving this would be a line by line comparison, 
with perhaps the transfer of a reference from new NaPTAN data, to the 
existing OSM data. If I appear in the history of the bus stop (Ctrl+h 
using JOSM), then there is a bus stop in that exact location. I 
suspect that this is true of many stops elsewhere, so some cautionary 
line by line merging is going to be needed.


I use the NOVAM - viewer from http://b3e.net/novam/ to check what 
needs doing, (Birmingham colour scheme suits my purpose). If you use 
this  zoom into Swanley, Kent (just off J3 of M25), you will find 
there are several stops which I have created, for which there is no 
NaPTAN data in the current database. It would obviously be sensible 
to add that data if you have it - just don't move the stop or change 
the other tags I've added please. You'll also see that I have marked 
some bus stops as 'not physically present'..


I think most mappers have worked from 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Surveying_and_Merging_NaPTAN_and_OSM_data 
(history shows this was last updated in 2011 with most of the updates 
from 2009), but there are more recent articles at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_Transport, and I'm not sure 
of what the current position is as the 'goal posts kept moving!'


Some sensible consultation aiming towards a goal we can understand 
and achieve would be good, because I personally just reached the 
stage where I made sure the bus stops were

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

[Nick Allen]

+2

Regards

Nick

On 16/11/13 18:01, ael wrote:

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 01:36:40PM +, David Earl wrote:

On 15/11/2013 20:15, Rob Nickerson wrote:

(The aim of this email is to provide prior knowledge of an upcoming change to 
the
OSM website and to give you an opportunity to provide constructive feedback)


Would it be possible to have a dismiss button on the Welcome to
OpenStreetMap box (including Learn More and Sign Up, but not
including search)? Just like the x on the panels that replace it,
e.g. when you search. Perhaps if you dismiss it it could join the
green buttons as 'Welcome' to get it back.

On iPad and netbooks, this box takes up a substantial part of the
screen obscuring the map. Less of a problem on larger screens, but
still intrusive if you want to see the whole map. Clearly it is a
very important part of the page when the whole point is to promote
OSM, but being able to make it go away would be helpful when you're
just trying to make use of the map.

+1

ael


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



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Land Registry postcode tool now running

[Nick Allen]

Looks like some very good work is going on in Ruislip!

When I saw the initial comment I also expected the changeset to be mine 
as it's the sort of thing I've been doing as well. Although I try to add 
a source code to everything I add to the data, I'm pretty sure there are 
times when I miss something. It's quite good to have this double level 
of history added to any changes - not only can you add a source tag, in 
my case probably


source=survey;Bing;Land Registry

but on the occasion where you miss that there is the changeset comment 
as well which makes it clear. Looks as if this mapper has covered this 
angle pretty clearly.


In a system where most of the 'rules' are governed by what most people 
have done, it's no surprise there is variation between how we apply a 
tag showing our sources.


Anyway, if you're looking for a project in OSM, adding addresses is 
easily accomplished. Personally I currently use Keypad-Mapper 3  
OSMTracker to do my surveying, and the exercise does me the world of good.


If anyone fancies joining in, I've outlined how I carry out the process 
at http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy


Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 28/09/13 20:45, Rob Nickerson wrote:

== Quote ==
I've just noticed (changeset 18037116) someone using this Land
Registry data search tool to actually populate, rather than simply
flag for re-survey postcode data.  Given that the Land Registry
require a copyright notice, and, unlike OS Open Data, there is no such
copyright notice on OSM, is this usage actually legal?
== End Quote ==

Hi,

Short answer= Yes, its fine, no problems.

Long Answer=
I was expecting that changeset to be mine, but pleased to see that 
other people are now using Matt's postcode tool.


To answer your question:- The data is available under the standard 
Open Government Licence (just like the ONS Postcode Centroids that I 
am also using if it is right above a house), and can therefore be used 
with attribution. The attribution is on the Contributors page [1] and 
has been since 31 August 2012. Only a very select few sources are also 
attributed on the Copyright page [2] and the page makes it clear that 
you should see the Contributors page for the other sources.


Best regards,
Rob Nickerson

[1] 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Land_Registry_-_Price_paid_data 


[2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright


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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] National speed limit changes

[Nick Allen]

Peter,

After your first post on this, my initial thought was that you were 
correct and the simpler tag you were proposing was enough. I started 
following your proposal, but I've thought a little more  feel that the 
more involved 'GB:nsl_single' type tag is actually needed  I'll be 
going back through my work over the last couple of days and changing it 
back.


My thinking is;

i/. The basis of GB law is that it is up to the individual to know what 
the law states, and to comply with it. No matter what your SatNav tells 
you it won't help you when you are standing in a court explaining your 
actions - the SatNav is a guide only and some maintain that they are 
unsafe as they distract the driver who may therefore miss the speed 
limits being displayed.


ii/. If you are driving a motor vehicle with very few exceptions you 
should comply with the law regarding speed limits.
   iia/. A built up area with street lighting (I'm not entirely sure 
how you define built up area, and I seem to remember something about the 
street lights being no more than 200 yards apart) will have a speed 
limit of 30 mph unless there are signs indicating otherwise,  there 
should be repeater signs at intervals if it is not a 30mph area.
   iib/. National speed limit signs - the national speed limit has 
changed during my lifetime. Motorways are fairly simple, and for a car 
(not towing) it will be 70mph. Two-way roads with a national speed limit 
sign are also fairly simple, being 60mph for a car (not towing). Dual 
carriageways - little bit more complex - an island in the middle of the 
road to assist pedestrians to cross is not sufficient to make it a dual 
carriageway, but you would need to look at the current case law to help 
in deciding what exactly is a dual carriageway. I don't think a long 
length of wide road with the lanes divided by white crosshatch markings 
on the road, even if this exists for a length measured in miles, counts 
as a dual carriageway - it needs to have a physical barrier involved.

   iiic/. A prescribed limit indicated by signs such as '40', '50' etc..

iii/. The current software writers who seem to be using OSM data are 
mainly wrestling with the basics of navigating a car anywhere in the 
world but I think steps are being made towards navigation for larger 
vehicles, and these vehicles are likely to have different speed limits 
imposed on them in GB national speed limit areas. If they are writing 
software for navigating a 40 tonne lorry across Europe then the least we 
can do is try to indicate what type of road it is so they can attempt to 
give an indication to the driver of what is the maximum speed they may 
legally travel at.


Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)


 Hi Peter,

Thanks for replying here.

Peter Miller wrote:


 So...on the basis that we should tag what is there, we see a white sign
with a black diagonal line on it then that is what we should indicate. We
do of course interpret that by putting what we believe if the correct legal
speed limit in maxspeed. As such a single carriageway national limit is
coded as maxspeed:type=gb:national,maxspeed=60 mph. As dual carriageway
is tagged as maxspeed:type=gb:national,maxspeed=70 mph. The motorway
version is highway=motorway,maxspeed:type=gb:national,maxspeed=70 mph.


I understand the potential problem (does a national speed limit dual
carriageway slip road count as a dual carriageway or not?) but am concerned
that changing e.g. GB:nsl_single to gb:national will:

o potentially obscure any underlying data errors (imagine something tagged
maxspeed=70 mph, maxspeed:type=GB:nsl_single)

o make things more difficult for data consumers (if only by changing the
data from something that they might be expecting)

o confuse new mappers who see data that they've entered being changed
because it's wrong, when in reality there really isn't a concensus on
this.

I fully accept that national speed limit tagging in the UK is a mess (at
the time of writing 4 of the top 6 values for
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/maxspeed:type#values could mean
the same thing) but any consolidation must proceed following discussion.


Sure, and I am politely inviting people to discuss the subject now and am
suggesting that it makes a lot of sense to consolidate around a tag value
which describes what one sees in front of one on the ground, ie a black and
white sign. To be clear I in the habit of using the nsl_single and nsl_dual
format until PinkDuck politely pointed out that I was tagging some
slip-road etc incorrectly and we agreed that is made more sense to avoid
the confusion in the first place and use the simpler gb:national.



With regard to the other point:


For avoidance of doubt, all my edits have been fully manual.


I don't believe that anyone has suggested otherwise


I was responding to Roberts comment above that I certainly don't think
there has been any discussion of or agreement for a mass mechanical edit to
change existing values.



although I 

Re: [Talk-GB] Land Registry postcode tool now running

[Nick Allen]

HADW,

I can see where your concerns stem from,  agree that some form of 
suitable source code to indicate where the data is derived from could 
mitigate any potential problems. At present there are some mappers, 
myself included, who are obtaining postcodes derived from the 'Land 
Registry price paid data' - we believe we are complying with the current 
legal requirements  are not introducing anything tainted into the 
database.


If we are subsequently shown to be wrong it could help any redaction 
process if we were all using the same tag to indicate the postcode was 
derived from the Land Registry Price Paid database. I'm currently 
planning to start using


source:postcode=Land Registry 'price paid' data

unless there is any strong guidance to indicate something more suitable.

As the postcode is the only part of the data I am using, another simple 
search would be for any postcodes, and then check their source tag.


Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 29/09/13 01:01, OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:

On 28 September 2013 20:52, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:

Oh I should add that I am a fan of source tags on the objects myself so I
add a source:postcode=Land Registry 'Price Paid' data tag (or =ONS
Postcode Centroids) to my edits. Not everyone agrees that source tags should
be added to the objects, preferring instead to add them to the changeset
comment.

I use a mixture of both, depending on the context.

Both are flawed, though.

Adding to objects doesn't work well when different tags have different
sources, and the geometry may have a different one too.  It is also
very vulnerable to people replacing the whole source with theirs.

Adding it to changeset comments means it doesn't survive splits and
merges.  The database has no knowledge that these actually happened
and doesn't record the audit trail necessary to find the true
provenance of a node, way or relation.  (For this reason, any
mechanical redaction is likely to be quite flawed.)

This lack of good traceability does worry me, as I see one of the
biggest threats to a cloud sourced project like this is people getting
over enthusiastic and importing copyright data, possibly in such small
individual amounts that no alarms sound, but when aggregated, enough
to get a copyright owner angry.  My feeling is that the upcoming
generation of contributors isn't so steeped in the concept of a map
that is untainted by material with restrictive copyrights, so will use
the easiest way of getting the data they want added.

The most important reason for sources may be to limit what has to be
taken down when a take down notice is received.

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



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

[Talk-GB] UK Postcodes

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I was wondering if there were any updates / progress on UK Postcodes. I 
have seen that the Land Registry Price Paid data is partially available 
on the 'Postcode finder website', but don't seem to be able to contact 
'Milliams' to see if any updates will be released (I'm probably looking 
in the wrong places!).


The http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors page has an entry;


 /Land Registry - Price paid data /

//

/OpenStreetMap contributors use the //Land Registry Price Paid Data 
http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/information/public-data/price-paid-data//as 
a source for address data. This data is published under the OGL and the 
following attribution is required. /


/This data covers the transactions received at land Registry in the 
period 01/02/2012 to the last day of the current month. © Crown 
copyright 2012. /


/If you have found an error with the data please contact //Her Majesty's 
Land Registry (HMLR) 
http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/professional/price-paid-error/


which looks promising.

I've been busily working away on the BR8 *** postcodes  am hoping the 
'http://milliams.dev.openstreetmap.org/postcodefinder/landregistry/' 
site will have regular updates (monthly?) which would be very helpful.


Regards

Nick (Tallguy)


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Postcodes

[Nick Allen]

Matt,

Thanks for the very good news.

Regards

Nick (Tallguy)
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

[Nick Allen]

Steve,

Putting another perspective on this, one of my other hobbies is 
Scouting, where I try to teach young people about maps  navigation. In 
this country there is a tendency to assume that any navigation must 
involve OS maps,  I try to widen their knowledge  get them to question 
the accuracy of anything they are using for navigation. I've put in 
quite a few boundaries  barriers, to OSM, and I produce paper maps for 
my Scouts to navigate by, before I introduce them to compasses, GPS's  
anything else that aids navigation.


As a mapper, I do find that it is getting more  more difficult to alter 
or add to data because we've added so much detail. I would like someone 
(sorry, don't have any skills in the software department) to produce 
something that aids in editing densely compacted data - certainly I've 
made my share of mistakes in the past  then spent twice as long trying 
to correct them.


I don't know about anyone else, but every so often I need a break from 
walking residential streets collating address details, and a walk in the 
countryside works for me.


Regards

Nick (Tallguy)

On 02/01/13 15:50, Steven Horner wrote:
I guess it depends on your uses for OSM, I come from a walking 
backgroundwith GIS use in my day job, I have completed Mountain Leader 
Training and I am interested in the possibilities of replacing 
Explorer maps (one day) with OSM. For this to happen boundaries would 
be  useful although not essential and their would be lot of other 
hurdles like Grids but that's a different topic.


I set this discussion away and expected different view points for and 
against. My take on all this is if you are happy to go out and map 
them, then do so. If someone else isn't interested in doing that then 
that's no problem and if a user doesn't want that information shown on 
map it could be removed from their rendering in the same way I wish it 
was available at lower zoom levels.


OSM is different things to different people and that is part of the 
beauty of it, in my mind the more detail the better the ability to 
view it our own ways is available although I wish their was a way to 
turn some things on and off more easily from Openstreetmap.org without 
rendering my own version.





On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com 
mailto:dave...@madasafish.com wrote:


On 31/12/2012 21:17, Steven Horner wrote:

Personally I would love to see fields (landuse) and the
walls/fences that make this up marked on OSM ...


I'm afraid I'm going to be a bit of a party pooper.

Whilst having all the boundary data in OSM would be nice, I'd
hardly call it essential. I do a lot of rural walking  always
record  map any barriers that are relevant to the path I'm on,
but, personally,  I consider mapping all hedges etc. a waste of
time. Why bother if no one is ever going to use that information
by walking there?

I consider farmland as the base layer  therefore rarely map it as
fields.

Cheers
Dave F.




--
www.stevenhorner.com http://www.stevenhorner.com
@stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
stevenhorner


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Unfit for motors - tagging for routing

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

This probably won't help the eventual tagging, but the 'unfit for 'wide 
/ long vehicles' bit is to do with legislation, both UK  nowadays 
European. I think the relevant bit is the 'Construction  Use 
Regulations' which lays down the maximum sizes for normal road usage. If 
the vehicle exceeds these dimensions (either weight, length, width or 
height' then they become an 'abnormal indivisible load', and require 
notifications to the police  other specialist departments before they 
are allowed to move. You also need special training  a permit / licence 
before you can drive one, and may need an escort if it is big enough. 
The vehicle is fitted with boards marking it as a 'long vehicle' or wide 
or whatever.


In simple terms, the dimensions have been standardised across the EEC, 
and if what your driving is big, it will be labelled as such  you will 
know anyway.



Regards

Nick (Tallguy)


On 17/12/12 14:35, cotswolds mapper wrote:
[I'm a bit confused about replying to the group, hope this goes to the 
right destination]


Belated thanks for the various comments, I've been away.

Of the various views, I tend to like highway=service + 
designation=unclassified_highway as the most useful. There are a lot 
of these signs in the Cotswolds - I could probably go out now and find 
100 before it gets dark. They include 'Unfit for HGVs' (or sometimes 
lorries), 'Unfit for wide vehicles'/'Unfit for long vehicles' (but no 
length/width given), 'Unfit for long and wide vehicles' (but 
presumably your short and narrow heavy vehicle is OK), etc, etc. 
 'Unsuitable' is sometimes used, but I think 'Unfit' is more common, I 
suspect because it avoids a wider sign on a narrow road..


I've been ignoring these signs as too difficult to deal with until 
now, but I thought there ought to be a solution to the 'Unfit for 
motors' one.  The legal definition is obviously important, but I think 
something more is needed to make the map useful (IMO, usefulness of 
the map is as important as accuracy).


Many of the Unfit for motors signs are for roads that you would 
happily drive along as one way streets, it's the lack of passing 
places that makes them problematic. The same sign is used for a narrow 
but decent tarmac road with no passing places for 400 yards and a lane 
to a house that disintegrates into an impassable ORPA (in OS terms) 
after the house.


More generally, there are lots of rural areas where all the roads are 
minor, but some are more (or less) minor than others. It would be 
useful to have tags that can distinguish between the useful minor 
roads and the ones that really are best avoided.


I agree highway=service is unsatisfactory, but with 
designation=unclassified_highway it seems the least worst route to a 
helpful map.


Rob


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest? (Thomas Wood

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

Not only is the NaPTAN data useful for planning journeys, but I've also
found it useful when mapping - if an area of the map contains bus stops
but no roads then you know it's worth going there for a bike ride!


Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Dartford mapping

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

If you do look at mapping further East, please be aware that the village
of Bean is now mapped - does not show up on 'noname' yet.


Nick
(Tallguy)


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Protecting the work - Probation?

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

One persons edits have created much talk as we are all worried about
damage to the work that has been put into the project, and rightly so.

When I started editing over a year ago I was worried (rightly on
occasion) that I was damaging rather than contributing, and this
actually made it harder for me to contribute  gain confidence.

There is now a person who's current edits are causing alarm. This
situation could alter in the future  their work then will be valued. We
could currently be looking at a gifted 5 year old who will write a new
operating system for mapping systems in the future. For now, they are
being monitored  incorrect edits repaired in one way or another.

Perhaps it is now time to consider different status's for user log-ins.
A 'probationer' could be someone new who's first few contributions need
monitoring to help them navigate the minefield of tagging, or an
existing user who's abilities have waned  now need monitoring, perhaps
temporarily. Anybody who's status is 'probationer' has their edits
validated before they are added to the database. The initial monitoring
would have to be for a very limited number of edits, but could provide
the necessary buffer to provide safety to the process. 

Nick (Tallguy)


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb