Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Martijn van Exel]

It sounds like one of those things where opinions are going to vary. Personally 
I would split them, but I don’t think it’s a big deal to do it one way or the 
other, and it doesn’t affect the map either way.

Mapping to make some random QA tool happy doesn’t sound tenable to me. Horea 
(my colleague) shared the OSMCha links mainly because that tool makes it easy 
to show all changesets of a group of mappers in one place. I think it’s a bit 
too opinionated when it comes to identifying ‘errors’. But hey, it’s open 
source software..:)

I’m happy that our work is being scrutinized. Please keep watching our work, we 
need your feedback to make sure we’re doing everything according to local best 
practices.

Martijn

> On Jan 23, 2019, at 2:43 PM, Mark Pulley  wrote:
> 
> I generally split these ways. A couple of reasons:
> 
> 1. Traffic is generally not meant to make U-turns here. Occasionally there is 
> an explicit no-U-turn sign, but most of the time there is a double white line 
> extending from the end of the median strip preventing turning.
> 
> 2. If a route relation uses the road, then it is required to split the road, 
> as traffic following the relation doesn’t do a U-turn. As an example, have a 
> look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1284045 
>  - ways 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175260353 
>  and 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175260354 
>  are the respective forward 
> members for each direction of travel. (Probably easier to see in the relation 
> editor in JOSM) 
> 
> Mark P.
> 
>> On 22 Jan 2019, at 8:23 am, Nemanja Bračko > > wrote:
>> 
>> @Warin,
>> 
>> I personally do not see why is it wrong if you split? It is just two 
>> segments merged in one node. Geometry and data are exactly the same just it 
>> is represented as two, instead of one line.
>> 
>> If we go deeper in this issue, it is actually wrong, because you have 
>> marked/mapped 2 physical segments with just one line. Angle is not natural 
>> for any road. However, it doesn't make any difference in routing so it is 
>> acceptable to be mapped as one line in cases like this.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Nemanja
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Mark Pulley]

I generally split these ways. A couple of reasons:

1. Traffic is generally not meant to make U-turns here. Occasionally there is 
an explicit no-U-turn sign, but most of the time there is a double white line 
extending from the end of the median strip preventing turning.

2. If a route relation uses the road, then it is required to split the road, as 
traffic following the relation doesn’t do a U-turn. As an example, have a look 
at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1284045 
 - ways 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175260353 
 and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175260354 
 are the respective forward 
members for each direction of travel. (Probably easier to see in the relation 
editor in JOSM) 

Mark P.

> On 22 Jan 2019, at 8:23 am, Nemanja Bračko  wrote:
> 
> @Warin,
> 
> I personally do not see why is it wrong if you split? It is just two segments 
> merged in one node. Geometry and data are exactly the same just it is 
> represented as two, instead of one line.
> 
> If we go deeper in this issue, it is actually wrong, because you have 
> marked/mapped 2 physical segments with just one line. Angle is not natural 
> for any road. However, it doesn't make any difference in routing so it is 
> acceptable to be mapped as one line in cases like this.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nemanja

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

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Warin]

For me, split ways means that there is some barrier between the two.
If there is no barrier then they should not be split.



On 22/01/19 08:33, David Wales wrote:
I don't know what the OSM convention is for this, but I tend to agree 
with Nemanja. It makes more sense to split the two halves of the road, 
rather than have them as a single way.


On 22 January 2019 8:23:35 am AEDT, "Nemanja Bračko" 
 wrote:


@Warin,

I personally do not see why is it wrong if you split? It is just
two segments merged in one node. Geometry and data are exactly the
same just it is represented as two, instead of one line.

If we go deeper in this issue, it is actually wrong, because you
have marked/mapped 2 physical segments with just one line. Angle
is not natural for any road. However, it doesn't make any
difference in routing so it is acceptable to be mapped as one line
in cases like this.

Thanks,
Nemanja

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, 21:33 Ben Kelley, mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Personally I think that's a handy warning.

   - Ben



On Tue., 22 Jan. 2019, 07:25 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
 wrote:

On 22/01/19 02:45, Nemanja Bračko wrote:

I agree on that, but that's the way how this tool works.


So you will have to accept that the tool is wrong and
ignore its output.

Altering the map to comply with a tool that is wrong is
wrong.




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

-- 


Sent from my phone



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



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

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[David Wales]

I don't know what the OSM convention is for this, but I tend to agree with 
Nemanja. It makes more sense to split the two halves of the road, rather than 
have them as a single way. 

On 22 January 2019 8:23:35 am AEDT, "Nemanja Bračko"  wrote:
>@Warin,
>
>I personally do not see why is it wrong if you split? It is just two
>segments merged in one node. Geometry and data are exactly the same
>just it
>is represented as two, instead of one line.
>
>If we go deeper in this issue, it is actually wrong, because you have
>marked/mapped 2 physical segments with just one line. Angle is not
>natural
>for any road. However, it doesn't make any difference in routing so it
>is
>acceptable to be mapped as one line in cases like this.
>
>Thanks,
>Nemanja
>
>On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, 21:33 Ben Kelley,  wrote:
>
>> Personally I think that's a handy warning.
>>
>>- Ben
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue., 22 Jan. 2019, 07:25 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On 22/01/19 02:45, Nemanja Bračko wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree on that, but that's the way how this tool works.
>>>
>>>
>>> So you will have to accept that the tool is wrong and ignore its
>output.
>>>
>>> Altering the map to comply with a tool that is wrong is wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>-- 
>
>Sent from my phone
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Nemanja Bračko]

@Warin,

I personally do not see why is it wrong if you split? It is just two
segments merged in one node. Geometry and data are exactly the same just it
is represented as two, instead of one line.

If we go deeper in this issue, it is actually wrong, because you have
marked/mapped 2 physical segments with just one line. Angle is not natural
for any road. However, it doesn't make any difference in routing so it is
acceptable to be mapped as one line in cases like this.

Thanks,
Nemanja

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, 21:33 Ben Kelley,  wrote:

> Personally I think that's a handy warning.
>
>- Ben
>
>
>
> On Tue., 22 Jan. 2019, 07:25 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On 22/01/19 02:45, Nemanja Bračko wrote:
>>
>> I agree on that, but that's the way how this tool works.
>>
>>
>> So you will have to accept that the tool is wrong and ignore its output.
>>
>> Altering the map to comply with a tool that is wrong is wrong.
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
-- 

Sent from my phone
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Ben Kelley]

Personally I think that's a handy warning.

   - Ben



On Tue., 22 Jan. 2019, 07:25 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:

> On 22/01/19 02:45, Nemanja Bračko wrote:
>
> I agree on that, but that's the way how this tool works.
>
>
> So you will have to accept that the tool is wrong and ignore its output.
>
> Altering the map to comply with a tool that is wrong is wrong.
>
>
>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Warin]

On 22/01/19 02:45, Nemanja Bračko wrote:

I agree on that, but that's the way how this tool works.


So you will have to accept that the tool is wrong and ignore its output.

Altering the map to comply with a tool that is wrong is wrong.


On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:32 PM Marc Gemis > wrote:


I think the QA tool should/could see that the sharp corner is in a
point shared with another way and that there is no reason to
report a warning.


On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM Nemanja Bračko mailto:brack...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Because tool doesn't know is this a special (allowed) case, or
user's mistake. It just reports that geometry is not logical.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:21 PM Marc Gemis
mailto:marc.ge...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Why does a split make any difference ? Is this a "special"
feature of the QA-tool you are using ?
The QA tool should understand that the sharp U-turn is not
the only route one can follow.

m.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:58 AM Nemanja Bračko
mailto:brack...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi!

You've been flagged as "Impossible angle in highway"
many times because of these situations:
2019-01-21 10_52_54-Window-min.jpg

Just split this way (do not map it as one segment),
and you will avoid to get flagged.

Best Regards,
Nemanja



On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:51 AM Horea Meleg
mailto:horea.me...@telenav.com>> wrote:

Hello all,

As we informed you two weeks ago we started
working on Australia editing in Canberra, Perth
and Melbourne.

If you’re curious in what we did, you can find our
changesets using these links:

AUS

ALLhttps://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9


AUS Flagged only

https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5




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

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Nemanja Bračko]

I agree on that, but that's the way how this tool works.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:32 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:

> I think the QA tool should/could see that the sharp corner is in a point
> shared with another way and that there is no reason to report a warning.
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM Nemanja Bračko  wrote:
>
>> Because tool doesn't know is this a special (allowed) case, or user's
>> mistake. It just reports that geometry is not logical.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:21 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>
>>> Why does a split make any difference ? Is this a "special" feature of
>>> the QA-tool you are using ?
>>> The QA tool should understand that the sharp U-turn is not the only
>>> route one can follow.
>>>
>>> m.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:58 AM Nemanja Bračko 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi!

 You've been flagged as "Impossible angle in highway" many times because
 of these situations:
 [image: 2019-01-21 10_52_54-Window-min.jpg]

 Just split this way (do not map it as one segment), and you will avoid
 to get flagged.

 Best Regards,
 Nemanja



 On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:51 AM Horea Meleg 
 wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> As we informed you two weeks ago we started working on Australia
> editing in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne.
>
> If you’re curious in what we did, you can find our changesets using
> these links:
>
> AUS ALL
> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9
>
> AUS Flagged only
> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5
>
>
>
> If you have any questions, feel free to ask us.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horea
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Marc Gemis]

I think the QA tool should/could see that the sharp corner is in a point
shared with another way and that there is no reason to report a warning.


On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM Nemanja Bračko  wrote:

> Because tool doesn't know is this a special (allowed) case, or user's
> mistake. It just reports that geometry is not logical.
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:21 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:
>
>> Why does a split make any difference ? Is this a "special" feature of the
>> QA-tool you are using ?
>> The QA tool should understand that the sharp U-turn is not the only route
>> one can follow.
>>
>> m.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:58 AM Nemanja Bračko 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> You've been flagged as "Impossible angle in highway" many times because
>>> of these situations:
>>> [image: 2019-01-21 10_52_54-Window-min.jpg]
>>>
>>> Just split this way (do not map it as one segment), and you will avoid
>>> to get flagged.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Nemanja
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:51 AM Horea Meleg 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hello all,

 As we informed you two weeks ago we started working on Australia
 editing in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne.

 If you’re curious in what we did, you can find our changesets using
 these links:

 AUS ALL
 https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9

 AUS Flagged only
 https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5



 If you have any questions, feel free to ask us.



 Best regards,

 Horea


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

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

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Nemanja Bračko]

Because tool doesn't know is this a special (allowed) case, or user's
mistake. It just reports that geometry is not logical.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:21 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:

> Why does a split make any difference ? Is this a "special" feature of the
> QA-tool you are using ?
> The QA tool should understand that the sharp U-turn is not the only route
> one can follow.
>
> m.
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:58 AM Nemanja Bračko 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> You've been flagged as "Impossible angle in highway" many times because
>> of these situations:
>> [image: 2019-01-21 10_52_54-Window-min.jpg]
>>
>> Just split this way (do not map it as one segment), and you will avoid to
>> get flagged.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Nemanja
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:51 AM Horea Meleg 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As we informed you two weeks ago we started working on Australia editing
>>> in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne.
>>>
>>> If you’re curious in what we did, you can find our changesets using
>>> these links:
>>>
>>> AUS ALL
>>> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9
>>>
>>> AUS Flagged only
>>> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you have any questions, feel free to ask us.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Horea
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Marc Gemis]

Why does a split make any difference ? Is this a "special" feature of the
QA-tool you are using ?
The QA tool should understand that the sharp U-turn is not the only route
one can follow.

m.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:58 AM Nemanja Bračko  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> You've been flagged as "Impossible angle in highway" many times because of
> these situations:
> [image: 2019-01-21 10_52_54-Window-min.jpg]
>
> Just split this way (do not map it as one segment), and you will avoid to
> get flagged.
>
> Best Regards,
> Nemanja
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:51 AM Horea Meleg 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> As we informed you two weeks ago we started working on Australia editing
>> in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne.
>>
>> If you’re curious in what we did, you can find our changesets using these
>> links:
>>
>> AUS ALL
>> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9
>>
>> AUS Flagged only
>> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5
>>
>>
>>
>> If you have any questions, feel free to ask us.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Horea
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Nemanja Bračko]

Hi!

You've been flagged as "Impossible angle in highway" many times because of
these situations:
[image: 2019-01-21 10_52_54-Window-min.jpg]

Just split this way (do not map it as one segment), and you will avoid to
get flagged.

Best Regards,
Nemanja



On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:51 AM Horea Meleg  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> As we informed you two weeks ago we started working on Australia editing
> in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne.
>
> If you’re curious in what we did, you can find our changesets using these
> links:
>
> AUS ALL
> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9
>
> AUS Flagged only
> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5
>
>
>
> If you have any questions, feel free to ask us.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horea
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Our work in last two weeks

[Horea Meleg]

Hello all,
As we informed you two weeks ago we started working on Australia editing in 
Canberra, Perth and Melbourne.
If you're curious in what we did, you can find our changesets using these links:
AUS ALL 
https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=22638c89-517b-45b7-889a-749a6d99ffa9
AUS Flagged only 
https://osmcha.mapbox.com/filters?aoi=9a2c90a1-6a45-4bb9-b52b-6f64b99e1cb5

If you have any questions, feel free to ask us.

Best regards,
Horea

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