Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-18 Thread Dave F
I see you point, but boundary is always preferable if possible. Geographical Suburbs appears ot be the main stumbling block. I haven't studied Alex's edits in detail but from his diary he appears to be duplicating; adding both boundary & is_in to the same entities. Superfluous. Dave F. On

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-17 Thread Colin Smale
I have already brought this to the attention of DWG. SomeoneElse has been attempting to moderate the tone on a couple of the changeset discussions. No idea if it is permanent, but alexkemp has switched his focus to houses/numbers in the last couple of days. //colin On 2016-08-17 13:58, Walter

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-17 Thread Walter Nordmann
No, alex has never been blocked: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp please contact DWG regards Walter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-17 Thread Andrew Hain
Every account that has ever been blocked has a link from the profile called “Active blocks”. -- Andrew From: Paul Sladen <o...@paul.sladen.org> Sent: 17 August 2016 11:04:20 To: Will Phillips Cc: Talk GB Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin bo

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-17 Thread Paul Sladen
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Will Phillips wrote: > On 15/08/2016 08:39, Colin Smale wrote: > > "This is an automated response: sorry, but I'm too busy mapping too be > > able to spare the time to respond to you. Thank you for your interest > > in my mapping. -Alex Kemp" > I have raised this issue with

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-17 Thread David Woolley
On 17/08/16 00:57, Dave F wrote: As far as I can see is_in:* is used for the same things as boundaries, but is less efficient & prone to errors. Are you aware of any utilities that use is_in:*? To me, the value of is_in is that it allows for cases where there is n usable source for the actual

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Dave F
On 16/08/2016 17:28, Colin Smale wrote: Dave, if the is_in values are based on common usage rather than administrative reality, then it would actually be correct to leave them unchanged. If a better way of doing something is created then the old methods become redundant & should be

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Andy Townsend
On 16/08/2016 21:57, Colin Smale wrote: Having just received another "too busy mapping" response to a changeset comment I have requested DWG to give alexkemp a 0-minute block to remind him of his duty to engage with the community in a proper way. We (the Data Working Group) normally use

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Colin Smale
Having just received another "too busy mapping" response to a changeset comment I have requested DWG to give alexkemp a 0-minute block to remind him of his duty to engage with the community in a proper way. Colin On 2016-08-16 14:55, Dave F wrote: > +1 > > Also his use of is_in:* is also

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Colin Smale
Dave, if the is_in values are based on common usage rather than administrative reality, then it would actually be correct to leave them unchanged. The point I am trying to make, is that I see a need to support a variety of addressing/location systems, which are all correct in their own way, but

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Dave F
I queried Alex's rational: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary/39062 As I noted is_in tags are hard-coded so become inaccurate if boundaries change. I also asked about Nominatim's search criteria on the Talk forum:

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Colin Smale
In the specific case of the UK, I am not convinced that is_in has no value at all. This is because of the huge divergence between people's perceptions and administrative reality. If you ask someone to give their location/current address, they will most likely refer to the postal addressing system,

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Dave F
+1 Also his use of is_in:* is also redundant when the boundary tag is used, Dave F. On 16/08/2016 13:25, Andy Allan wrote: On 16 August 2016 at 13:11, Will Phillips wrote: Regarding the 'ref:hectares' tag, it does seem wrong to me. It's not consistent with other uses of

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-16 Thread Will Phillips
On 15/08/2016 08:39, Colin Smale wrote: Hi, I noticed a number of new admin boundaries have been tagged with ref:hectares=* with the numeric value giving the area of the entity in hectares. This feels to me like an inappropriate use of "ref" and also redundant as the area can be calculated

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-15 Thread Andrew Hain
Do we know how these values are calculated, for instance do they come from an external source? -- Andrew From: Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> Sent: 15 August 2016 08:39 To: Talk-GB Subject: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-resp

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-15 Thread Andrew Hain
Just out of interest, are unincorporated areas in Australia tagged with boundary relations? -- Andrew From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> Sent: 15 August 2016 12:00 To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, a

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-15 Thread Warin
On 8/15/2016 7:03 PM, Colin Smale wrote: Hi Will, Fully agree with you. I also tried to contribute to that changeset discussion. If you hadn't reverted that admin level change, I would have... Some of his ideas are on his diary pages [1] and my admin boundary page [2]. Colin [1]

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-15 Thread Colin Smale
Hi Will, Fully agree with you. I also tried to contribute to that changeset discussion. If you hadn't reverted that admin level change, I would have... Some of his ideas are on his diary pages [1] and my admin boundary page [2]. Colin [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-15 Thread Will Phillips
Hi, This user is currently adding admin_level=10 admin boundaries, which we use for civil parishes (or communities), to areas where no such administrative unit exists. To me this seems problematic because my understanding is that these are legal entities which either exist or they don't.

[Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

2016-08-15 Thread Colin Smale
Hi, I noticed a number of new admin boundaries have been tagged with ref:hectares=* with the numeric value giving the area of the entity in hectares. This feels to me like an inappropriate use of "ref" and also redundant as the area can be calculated simply from the geometry anyway. When I