[OSM-talk] Forests are mappable - was: Re: OTG rule, borders & mountains existing | Re: Crimea situation - on the ground

lygons are created with inner for lakes and > > > all the problems related to this. > > On Feb 11  18 h 49 min 26 s UTC−5, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > >  ??? just do not create unreasonably large multipolygons (or split > >existing, > > possibly undo im

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects

25 Feb 2020, 18:03 by to...@disroot.org: > W dniu 20-02-25 o 16:29, Maarten Deen pisze: > > >> I don't think so. >> The common language on this list is English, as the common language on >> talk-nl is Dutch and on talk-pl is Polish. Why don't I go to talk-pl >> and

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects

25 Feb 2020, 19:15 by to...@disroot.org: > W dniu 20-02-25 o 18:43, Mateusz Konieczny via talk pisze: > > >> Yes, and for pragmatic reasons we use English. >> >> We are not using Esperanto, because unlike >> English nearly noone is capable of communicating i

Re: [OSM-talk] MapRoulette - cryptic tasks

26 Feb 2020, 12:57 by frede...@remote.org: > Is there even any quality control when people create new MapRoulette > tasks? > > AFAIK no. I opened issue on maproulette GitHub requesting taking down this task as it is not something that improves OSM. I also contacted main (sole?) editor adding

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] How to map an OpenStreetMap map?

29 Feb 2020, 11:58 by r...@technomancy.org: >  Do yous think `map_source=openstreetmap` is a good tag? > Yes, though I think that posting the same thread to tagging and talk ml is a poor idea.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-talk] The benefits of cross-linking OSM and Wikidata

Mar 4, 2020, 16:42 by oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch: > It is possible not only to add the Wikidata IDs to the OSM map, but also to > add (or verify) > the geographical coordinates in the Wikidata items themselves, > Using OSM data? ___ talk mailing

Re: [OSM-talk] The benefits of cross-linking OSM and Wikidata

Mar 4, 2020, 18:58 by tilmanreine...@yahoo.de: > Mar 4, 2020, 16:42 by oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch: > >>> It is possible not only to add the Wikidata IDs to the OSM map, but also to >>> add (or verify) >>> the geographical coordinates in the Wikidata items themselves, >>> >> Using OSM data?

Re: [OSM-talk] Digital environmentalism

There are many reasons to use OSM over Google Maps but "environmentally friendly" seems to not be one of them. One may try some very indirect things, like that Google Maps is primarily a place to display ads, therefore pushing consumerism, therefore environmentally unfriendly but... Maybe "OSM

Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated" - fake building for several shops inside one building

5 Feb 2020, 21:06 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com: > Hello, > >> I've now moved to tagging as many of them them as 'fixme' >> > > nice to highlight the issue. > but why not fixing it ? > In case of systematic mass edit, (especially by paid mappers) it may take unreasonable effort to fix it. And

Re: [OSM-talk] Crimea situation - on the ground

Feb 6, 2020, 14:59 by pella.s...@gmail.com: > Without "empathy" - we can map> "nesting locations of vulnerable species"> > - because of the cold logic of the "> on the ground rule" > I am OK with not mapping some objects (private features, rare birds, places of worship where given religion is

Re: [OSM-talk] Crimea situation - on the ground

Feb 7, 2020, 14:09 by tomasstrau...@gmail.com: > 1. On the ground rule has a number of different interpretations > Maybe. Is any of this interpretations leading to conclusion that Ukraine is de facto controlling Crimea? > interpretation of "we check everything on the ground literally" is an

Re: [OSM-talk] it's not a fake, but "it's complicated"

Feb 5, 2020, 16:45 by ma...@anche.no: > something done by Kaart editors: > > Are they organized mappers? Are they paid mappers? > splitting a building into as many slices as the amount of commercial > activities within the building > Sound blatantly incorrect to me. You can map shop as

Re: [OSM-talk] New Telegram chat for OSM + LGBTQIA*

28 Jan 2020, 23:19 by ricoz@gmail.com: > On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 10:58:01PM +, Alan Mackie wrote: > >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_centric_Telegram_accounts ? >> > > thanks, for some reason it was not easy to find. > Do you remember search terms that you tried? Or

Re: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

19 Feb 2020, 00:14 by yuriastrak...@gmail.com: > It is very strange that we, on one hand, allow anyone to create any kind of > tags (just type it in), and on the other we create so many hurdles to > document it (we refuse to allow a wiki page about an item, but instead demand > that each key

Re: [OSM-talk] Web editors and lane rendering

19 Feb 2020, 05:27 by ba...@ursamundi.org: > Could we get some lane editing/rendering in these editors to cut down on this > kind of unintentionally erratic mapping? > Not sure whatever Potlatch is still developed, but have you checked whatever some simple formof displaying this tags is

Re: [OSM-talk] Web editors and lane rendering

19 Feb 2020, 05:57 by ba...@ursamundi.org: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 10:45 PM Mateusz Konieczny >> but have you checked whatever some simple form >> of displaying this tags is already requested for iD? >> > > It's definitely not.  Here's what JOSM and what ID shows over the Bing > imagery at

Re: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

18 Feb 2020, 21:57 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> Il giorno 18 feb 2020, alle ore 18:32, Joseph Eisenberg >> ha scritto: >> >> Therefore, I propose that Yurikbot be changed to only add new data >> items for documented tags which already have a wiki page in at least

Re: [OSM-talk] IME no proposals needed | Re: Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

19 Feb 2020, 08:27 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > There are those who; > think the proposal process it the only way to create wiki pages. > there are those who degenerate wiki pages with few uses, to the extent > of editing those wiki pages to discourage use.  > Proposal pages are

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

20 Feb 2020, 18:44 by si...@poole.ch: > > Am 19.02.2020 um 14:24 schrieb Christoph Hormann: > >> In this case the statement that "small maps or multiple data sources" >> are the only cases where the document does not require visible >> attribution is wrong. For example it is later stated

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

20 Feb 2020, 12:09 by o...@imagico.de: > That an attribution  > hidden under an 'i' visible only on user interaction does not qualify > as such is self evident i think. > +1 I am quite confused why it is explicitly listed as acceptable. Is someone thinking that typical people  click on every

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

19 Feb 2020, 17:22 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > But I stick to the comment that 500px are far too many (=1000 actual retina > pixels or 1500 px on a retina@3).  > Yes, you may easily fit at least "© OSM" with link in such space. Suggesting that real attribution is  not required in such case is

[OSM-talk] Is there some existing detailed tutorial directed at complete newbies? Describing how to add various features?

Is there some automatically generated website describing in excruciating detail how to map various features? Something directed to a potential mappers, explicitly describing every single smallest step, for every single mappable feature. I ask as I had again a friend asking me "how to add

Re: [OSM-talk] Is there some existing detailed tutorial directed at complete newbies? Describing how to add various features?

ld > like to know.  > No, he was unaware that it can be done this way and that it is relatively simple. (I hope that it is relatively simple) > > On 22 February 2020 05:37:13 CET, Mateusz Konieczny via talk > wrote: > >> Is there some automatically generated website >>

Re: [OSM-talk] Is there some existing detailed tutorial directed at complete newbies? Describing how to add various features?

22 Feb 2020, 10:37 by si...@poole.ch: > > From a pedagogic point of view I would consider that suboptimal, no to > mention that it would be endless. > > I expect that endless part may be solved by generating it automatically from iD and Vespucci presets. > > For anybody that is going to

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

19 Feb 2020, 21:05 by si...@poole.ch: > > > > Am 19.02.2020 um 20:17 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via talk: > >> 19 Feb 2020, 17:22 by >> dieterdre...@gmail.com>> : >> >>> But I stick to the comment that 500px are far too many (=1000

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

19 Feb 2020, 13:14 by o...@imagico.de: > Anyway - while i am not surprised about this it is sobering how little > of the feedback provided in previous conversation - in particular from: > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2019-August/thread.html#83068 > > has found a substantial

Re: [OSM-talk] OTG rule, borders & mountains existing | Re: Crimea situation - on the ground

Feb 12, 2020, 00:07 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > Feb 11, 15:59, stevea wrote : > > > Rather than get snarled in counter-examples, let's discuss how OTG isn't > > and can't be strictly > > followed in many cases.  It IS followed in the majority of cases, but in > > those corner cases where

Re: [OSM-talk] #AttributionIsNotOptional experiment on OSM France tile servers

Mar 11, 2020, 15:37 by si...@poole.ch: > > As I wrote (conveniently ignored in the noise of the vigilante rampage): > " > > I guess that people were irritated by describing gentle reminder about license requirements using pejorative terms ("deface") where their applicability was dubious.

Re: [OSM-talk] Announcing Daylight Map Distribution

Mar 10, 2020, 23:17 by m...@teczno.com: > things we filtered out individually because we found a problem with them > Once this is separated out it may be interesting to use. Especially if one will be able to filter by error/heuristic type. Maybe some will report serious issues not detected by

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

To authors of this proposed attribution guideline. Why it is contains misleading recommendation that real attribution may be not present on mobile devices? Is it something that will be discussed on LWG meeting today? (this time I should be able to participate via Mumble, not sure whatever it is

Re: [OSM-talk] The benefits of cross-linking OSM and Wikidata

Mar 5, 2020, 15:39 by r...@technomancy.org: > On 05/03/2020 15:25, Sören Reinecke via talk wrote: > >> couldn't we do a vote about that? Would it be possible for the OSMF to >> maintain and coordinate such a voting. >> > > Yes, we _could_. > > It would require a 2/3 majority of “active [OSM]

Re: [OSM-talk] Interstate naming in the United States

Mar 5, 2020, 17:39 by ba...@ursamundi.org: > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:32 AM Jack Armstrong <> jacknst...@sprynet.com> > > wrote: > >> I suppose almost all U.S. interstate highways could be "named" the Dwight D. >> Eisenhower Interstate Highway. A few years ago a user "named" I-70 and

Re: [OSM-talk] Interstate naming in the United States

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name alt_name, loc_name (?), reg_name <> (?) seems fitting In case of multiple alternative names use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator alt_name=Foobar;Qwerty alt_name_1, alt_name_2 is rather poor idea, see

Re: [OSM-talk] #AttributionIsNotOptional experiment on OSM France tile servers

Mar 8, 2020, 20:26 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > > Mar 8, 2020, 12:12 by si...@poole.ch: > >> >> I would be very very wary of doing anything that deliberately defaces a >> web site without consulting with a local (to the country the web site >> is in) lawyer, particularly if the

Re: [OSM-talk] #AttributionIsNotOptional experiment on OSM France tile servers

Mar 8, 2020, 16:42 by ma...@anche.no: > > not to deface any web site relying on OSM.  or we would put the > wrongdoing on our side. > > Enforcing attribution requirements is not wrongdoing. It is something that we should do more, and this specific method is very friendly. Map is mostly

Re: [OSM-talk] #AttributionIsNotOptional experiment on OSM France tile servers

Mar 8, 2020, 12:12 by si...@poole.ch: > > I would be very very wary of doing anything that deliberately defaces a > web site without consulting with a local (to the country the web site is > in) lawyer, particularly if the message implies wrong doing. > > Illegal use of OSM data

Re: [OSM-talk] fixme=name

Mar 12, 2020, 23:54 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 12. Mar 2020, at 17:42, Marc M. wrote: >> >> we may delete all fixme=name for all object without a name tag >> > > > I agree that fixme=name for missing names is pointless and could be removed > (although Andy has

Re: [OSM-talk] traceability of edits

In case of continued refusal to follow https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines you can also try contacting DWG for help. ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group ) Mar 14, 2020, 15:20 by ma...@anche.no: > according to Apple, in the person of Andrew

Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

Apr 28, 2020, 06:48 by si...@poole.ch: > > Am 27.04.2020 um 19:49 schrieb Alexandre Oliveira: > >> Hello! >> >> I'll try to be brief and explain the main problems that exist with >> OSM's way of handling lack of (proper) attribution. >> > There was just a (nearly 100 messages) long thread on

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

May 3, 2020, 18:10 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com: > I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys > and tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata > Yes, infobox is for the

Re: [OSM-talk] Quality and the Openstreetmap value chain

May 12, 2020, 14:06 by frede...@remote.org: > Colin, > > you're lumping in a few different things together I think. > > The scarce resource in this project are still mappers, not consumers. > The mappers certainly want to make a good and usable map; but if you are > faced with a choice of

Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

May 12, 2020, 05:48 by rockyt...@gmail.com: >> >> > As Joseph said: > >> The attribution goes on the map. >> This is not a difficult requirement to meet. >> > > >> The most recent version of the guidelines >> drafted by the LWG is almost there, but has drawn community criticism >> about being

[OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - remove tracking parameters

URL often have unnecessary parts, typically added for tracking purposes. This tracking parameters sshould never appear in any osm tags. FB, Google and other add tracking links for various purposes. It means that it is beneficial to turn tag

Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

May 13, 2020, 12:39 by si...@poole.ch: > > > > Am 12.05.2020 um 23:03 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via talk: > >> >> >> >> May 12, 2020, 05:48 by >> rockyt...@gmail.com>> : >> >>>> >>>> >>> As Josep

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - remove tracking parameters

;, "gclid", "campaign_ref", "mc_id", "utm_source", > "utm_medium", "utm_term", "utm_content", "utm_campaign" > > someone who doesn't read the code, must still be able > to easily understand the criteria of th

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - remove tracking parameters

May 13, 2020, 17:31 by doerr.step...@gmail.com: > On 13/05/2020 12:40, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > >> Proposed bot edit would remove links where all used parameters are tracking >> users and may be removed. >> > > Sounds good. Will you limit individ

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - remove tracking parameters

May 14, 2020, 01:32 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > > >> On 13. May 2020, at 13:44, Mateusz Konieczny via talk >> wrote: >> >> It means that it is beneficial to turn tag >> website=>> >> h

Re: [OSM-talk] Microgrants Committee call for review

BTW, if you never edited wiki then you need to sign up at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CreateAccount=Microgrants%2FMicrogrants+2020 Your usual OSM account will now work (unfortunately). And endorsement will be treated more seriously if made from an account (for bonus

Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

e info about that specific case at https://github.com/matkoniecz/illegal-use-of-OpenStreetMap/blob/master/Mapbox/Mapbox.md#mapbox-is-using-openstreetmap-data-illegally (yes Mapbox was notified, yes Mapbox ignored it). May 13, 2020, 14:33 by si...@poole.ch: > > Am 13.05.20

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM is not the place for dissemination of authoritative data sets

Mar 19, 2020, 12:28 by frede...@remote.org: > Hi, > > a propos a recent statement from our friends at Facebook in which they > make plans for the future of our project, > > https://tech.fb.com/map-with-ai-updates/ > >> Beyond AI-based data sets, one of the biggest challenges for OSM is >>

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM is not the place for dissemination of authoritative data sets

Mar 19, 2020, 12:57 by mikel.ma...@gmail.com: > Frederik, you’re crying out against phantoms, and getting stuck on one > interpretation of the word “authoritative”, and using that misinterpretation > as an excuse to beat on one of your favorite punching bags, and try to exact > radical

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM is not the place for dissemination of authoritative data sets

Mar 19, 2020, 17:54 by j...@betra.is: > However I believe including them is beneficial for OSM and its users and so > have been doing updates as I can. However it is not an easy process for large > areas, having to chop the huge Vatnajökulsþjóðgarður (over 15% of Iceland) up > due to max

Re: [OSM-talk] our Q site help.openstreetmap.org is dying

May 20, 2020, 15:25 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > Personally my preference would be to close help.osm.org and move to a > proper SO site via the Area 51 process which should be no problem for a > community of our size. > > I imagine that will be unpopular with a subset of our users however. > >

Re: [OSM-talk] our Q site help.openstreetmap.org is dying

May 20, 2020, 09:28 by l...@tobias-wrede.de: > Can we involve any of the OSM organizations to find, maybe pay, someone? > The question is about the plan. Life support for this specific platform? It sounds like an endless pit that can consume plenty of resources, but maybe I am too

Re: [OSM-talk] our Q site help.openstreetmap.org is dying

Stack Overflow is using the same type as software, not the same software. May 20, 2020, 14:52 by andreas.vi...@gmail.com: > Can't we update as they do? > Stack Exchange is running private proprietary software, that is a separate platform. And yes, you can pay them to run your own instance. At

Re: [OSM-talk] talk Digest, Vol 189, Issue 24

May 20, 2020, 23:57 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > I don't believe you can migrate to StackExchange - we would have to > start over if we went that route. > Or copy especially useful content manually? Even in case of conflicting licences authors of given answer would be able to reuse them. > You

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

May 22, 2020, 13:23 by frede...@remote.org: > no documentation of the project > (...) > If you feel they are disregarding that message, we are happy to block > them again. > Neither https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities nor

[OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

I just added some example at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access and improved existing one. Review, and improving edits (or comments here) would be welcomed. Deliberately posting to talk to get review also from people less involved in tagging discussions. Thanks to Malenki and

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Are you sure that in 72427535 buildings were just moved? buildings and college that used to be mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-12.94547/28.64318 It is gone thanks to https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=72427535 BTW how

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Nice busy beaver. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/mapper Graffiti put on over 800 000 objects, cleanup will take some time. For blocking given that they got warning already that was completely ignored. May 22, 2020, 15:47 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > Le vendredi 22 mai 2020 07 h 29 min

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM data without attribution

AFAIK such text should be perfectly fine as long as it is clear displayed (not deeply hidden in weird menu, not hidden behind basically never clicked buttons and so on). ODBL requires to make users aware of source and license, it does not mandate a specific text. For example on my laser cut map I

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM data without attribution

11 Sep 2020, 18:18 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 11. Sep 2020, at 13:21, Mateusz Konieczny via talk >> wrote: >> >> For example on my laser cut map I used >> "Dane z OpenStreetMap na licencji ODBL" >>

[OSM-talk] Website showing what was just edited

I remember website showing what was just edited in OpenStreetMap. I was unable to find it. Is it still up?___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information Do you think that this page is a good description of community consensus? The page has "This page is under development (May 2020). It may not yet reflect community consensus." and I would like to check whatever it

Re: [OSM-talk] Website showing what was just edited

Thanks, I was looking for exactly this one! Sep 15, 2020, 21:16 by www.ha...@gmail.com: > It was called Show me the Way ( > https://osmlab.github.io/show-me-the-way/> > ). > > Greetings > > Michał > > wt., 15 wrz 2020, 21:11 użytkownik Mateusz Konieczny via tal

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

Note that https://www.twobirds.com/en/in-focus/general-data-protection-regulation/gdpr-tracker/deceased-persons seems to indicate that at least in some countries it is different Denmark: "§ 2(5): Data Protection Act and the GDPR apply to deceased persons until 10 years after the time of death."

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

From:> Martin Koppenhoefer > > Sent:> 16 September 2020 08:51 > > To:> Mateusz Konieczny > > Cc:> OSM Talk > > Subject:> Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - > wiki page> >   > > > se

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

by nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk: > > Yes - that's absolutely fine! Just wanted to clarify it here so that the > wording could be altered (I'm quite happy to do this myself). > > Thanks, > Nick > > > > > > From:> Mateusz Konieczny via talk > > Sent:> 16 S

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

nd would be mappable, but I had no real contact with either type. I added https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information#Limitations to describe limitations of that page Sep 16, 2020, 10:24 by frede...@remote.org: > Hi, > > On 16.09.20 09:17, Mateusz Konieczn

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

Sep 16, 2020, 11:38 by o...@imagico.de: > On Wednesday 16 September 2020, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> >> > simple: Individual humans as well as their activities and social >> > interactions between individual humans - including permanent >> > physical manifestations of those - are not as

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples of good paid mapping?

12 Sep 2020, 15:42 by frede...@remote.org: > Hi, > > On 9/11/20 23:57, Bryce Cogswell via talk wrote: > >> Exactly. When companies do it right nobody knows they’re doing it.  >> > > Except that - because they do it right - they will of course have > documented their work on the wiki. > Or it

Re: [OSM-talk] M$ Flightsimulator

31 Aug 2020, 16:55 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 31. Aug 2020, at 16:06, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: >> >> Google Maps isn't a data source that is compatible with OpenStreetMap >> license wise. >> > > > sure, if this wasn’t clear, of course I didn’t mean to import

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM ↔ Wikidata - new tool encouraging automated / mechanical addition of wikidata tags

I used it with manual review of tagged objects and with verification of every match. It is necessary as many matches are spurious/invalid (see bug reports at https://github.com/EdwardBetts/osm-wikidata/issues ). Note that it is not criticism of the tool - some false positives will be always

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging health facilities offering COVID testing

I would not map them myself or encourage others, but I would say that it is mappable. Oct 8, 2020, 18:26 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > Where I am, there is wide variety in what days/hours such sites are > available, whether they are free or have a cost, whether you need an > appointment, and

Re: [OSM-talk] Can you recommend good introduction to JOSM for 100% osm newbie?

5 paź 2020, 12:19 od ajt1...@gmail.com: > On 05/10/2020 08:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> sent from a phone >> >>> On 5. Oct 2020, at 00:58, Michael Booth >>> >>> >> OSM newbie unless there was a specific

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

(1) Wikipedia may strongly encourage or mandate it in theory, but there are still edits being made without any citations (2) Wikipedia is explicitly forbidding original research, OSM is explicitly encouraging it The best edits are where people map things not mapped anywhere else, or at least not

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

Thanks to DWG for taking this action. Aug 22, 2020, 03:35 by claysmal...@gmail.com: > For those who aren't following, the DWG recently decided on a two-day ban for > the person who posted this, for the exact behavior they're exhibiting right > now: >

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

Nobody claims OpenStreetMap data contains no mistakes. Are you really expecting that we will be shocked by proof that some data somewhere is wrong? I would be able to post one mail per minute with examples of serious mistakes, forever - even after my death, as it would be fairly easy to

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

"It a playground with half-ass quality more than an authoritative and verified source of information (like e.g. Wikipedia)" I am not sure whatever you claim that Wikipedia is "playground with half-ass quality" or "authoritative and verified source of information". Though any of this claims

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

Aug 22, 2020, 11:28 by pang...@riseup.net: > Hi  > > Mateusz Konieczny skrev: (22 augusti 2020 10:51:49 > CEST) > >(1) Wikipedia may strongly encourage or mandate it in theory, but there > >are > >still edits being made without any citations > > Yeah I know, but the point is its really hard

[OSM-talk] Can you recommend good introduction to JOSM for 100% osm newbie?

I looked at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Guide and https://learnosm.org/en/josm/ but I am not fully happy about any of them (a bit too much at one for someone new) Why not iD: they want to edit and fix hiking relations, what AFAIK is not

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

May 27, 2020, 17:31 by etcomma...@gmail.com: >> I know I can use JOSM to copy data from OHM to OSM, but for a large >> geographic area I don't think that would not be practical. >> I would JOSM to download OHM and save it as an .osm file and process it further. I wanted to link OHM planet

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 25, 2020, 00:45 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > > May 24, 2020, 23:54 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > >> >> On 2020-05-24 23:16, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: >> >> >>> Can you give an example of such untaggable restriction? >>>  

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 24, 2020, 23:54 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > > On 2020-05-24 23:16, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > > >> Can you give an example of such untaggable restriction? >>   >> > In the UK there are many small roads signed as "Unsuitable for HGVs." L

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 24, 2020, 23:57 by f...@zz.de: > At least thats very different in Germany. There is no such thing as > "Stand your ground" in the US legalese. As long as you dont show > clear intend of "out of bounds" e.g. fences, gates or signage > its not a federal offense to walk on private property.

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 25, 2020, 00:36 by a...@thaw.de: >> Is access=private supposed to be incorrect in either case? >> > > I would argue that non-gated driveways are often closer to access=destination > than they are to access=private. > > According to the wiki, private requires individual permission, which I

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

May 25, 2020, 06:37 by jacknst...@sprynet.com: > > Greetings. > > > > > > Recently, a user mapped “razed” railways inside a construction zone (link > below). These rails had been removed by our local mappers since they don’t > exist anymore. Using the latest imagery (Maxar), you can see the

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 24, 2020, 18:06 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > > >> On 24. May 2020, at 12:16, Mateusz Konieczny via talk >> wrote: >> >> I just added some example at >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access >&g

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 25, 2020, 02:56 by a...@thaw.de: > Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > >> >> I just added some example at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access >> and improved existing one. >> >> Review, and improving edits (or comments here) would be welco

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

he end, at least after the specification (so list of > transport modes and possible values) > > 1. Introduction (as exists) > 2. Full list of transport modes > 3. List of possible values > 4. Examples > > On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 20:16, Mateusz Konieczny via talk <> >

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

May 25, 2020, 16:48 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > > On 2020-05-25 16:20, Jack Armstrong wrote: > > >> Why are railways given a special status? >> > Nobody gives anything a status in OSM. Nothing is "approved" so nothing is > "forbidden" either. > It is not really accurate - there is plenty of

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

May 25, 2020, 17:34 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > > On 2020-05-25 17:08, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > > >> May 25, 2020, 16:48 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: >> >>> >>> On 2020-05-25 16:20, Jack Armstrong wrote: >>> >>> >>

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

, 2020, 17:32 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > ? should a highway never built in 2011, mapped, that goes through a farm > still be there even if tagged  >   > right, and if not who has a right to remove it ? >   > >> Monday, May 25, 2020 10:10 AM -05:00 from Ma

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM nicknames are Unicode characters? (not Ascii?)

See case of anyone from Russia or Łukasz from Poland. Or people from China/Japan. While banning some characters may be reasonable it is complex, and unlikely to be very important. May 28, 2020, 15:02 by mbran...@gmail.com: > Hallo, > I was surprised finding an OSM username written in gothic

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM nicknames are Unicode characters? (not Ascii?)

May 28, 2020, 15:38 by martin.zd...@freemap.sk: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 3:34 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <> > dieterdre...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >>  햒햆햘햙햗햔 has nothing to do with mastro, although it might look as if it has. >> > > Google has different opinion ;-) > "햒햆햘햙햗햔 has nothing to do

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

May 27, 2020, 01:40 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > then why are there tags ? >   > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway >   > and if the platform posts are still there ? >   > >> Tuesday, May 26, 2020 4:52 PM -05:00 from Jack Armstrong >> : >>   >> Thanks. I'll try that. >>  

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

(1) sorry for an empty email send earlier (2) we have plenty of things that should not be added https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/mapper - single paid mapping group produced 800 000+ instances of an unwanted tag (they promised recently to fix it) (3) sometimes this tags are used to

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

May 26, 2020, 15:53 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > > > On 26/05/2020 09:19, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: > >> >> sorry, my fault, it is bicycle_road=yes in addition to highway=* >> (usually residential) >> >> and it isn't a cycleway as it is a regular road that is either blocked >> for most motor

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

May 24, 2020, 20:47 by f...@zz.de: > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 12:10:41PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > >> I just added some example at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access >> and improved existing one. >> >> Review, and improving edits (or co

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

> DaveF. >   > > On 24/05/2020 11:10, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > >> I just added some example at >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access>> and improved existing >> one.Review, and improving edits (or comments here)

  1   2   3   4   5   >