ment a bit.
It looks like it's a pretty large (ahem) mess to clean up; good luck. Please
be careful not to delete data which might actually be real (good data). For
example, you might add a satellite imagery layer to your JOSM session, so you
can see what's "really"
th improper rotation orientation.
That's not a terrible error, and yes, correcting those would be a great deal of
effort with relatively small benefit in correctness for the map (in my
opinion). However, "better is better," so spend your time a
Excellent suggestions, Blake!
SteveA
> On Jul 8, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Blake Girardot wrote:
>
> You could convert them all to centroids, points are a valid and
> correct building mapping object type as well.
>
> That would retain the key information, the location of the build
er
that might be in the guise of an OSM volunteer who subscribes here) could
politely answer this phone call, even quite well.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
ruly
parallel a large effort to get substantial data into OSM over a medium- or
longer-term time frame (weeks, months, even years, as some projects like
high-speed rail can even take decades), there ARE circumstances where
state=proposed or unsigned_ref can facilitate good route data entry into OSM.
Thank you f
John's on the path here: let's eliminate a potential cut-and-paste (or
remember "too many digits" step). If there isn't an app (Android, iOS...) for
"tap this button to ask the GPS to put my lat-lon into a (decimal) text string
and prompt me for the phone # of an SMS that sends it (with my
OSM to standardize a 'plain
vanilla' version of this" (and maybe OSM has something to do with a sort of
"generic, install on your phone as a good idea," maybe not) here.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Thank you for introducing the topic, John. May it
continue and blossom.
SteveA
> On Aug 17, 2019, at 8:19 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On the SMS front, it is not a question of an app but the receiving
> organisation
>
> Internationally 112 is the single num
up ourselves, developing it similar to how commercial companies do
so. There's a lot of experience in OSM of "open projects," including open data
projects, let's leverage that knowledge. But ours should be "all OSM, built
right here in OSM." We already do that to a large
attribution." Do I miss something?
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
M is, and will always be, a human-participating project, with all
of the social and "get outdoors and map" project as one (human) might like it
to be. AI can and does help, that's fine, as long as humans are always "in
charge."
Again, it sounds like there is a l
doing so.
It sounds like we largely agree. Provided we keep quality at the top of our
consciousness as we do so, whether we use AI or not.
I appreciate the opportunity to share dialog,
SteveA
> On Jul 31, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Kathleen Lu wrote:
>
> I agree that human wisdom is critical
amatically: do we really want to hasten "the robots are
taking over" by taking the throttle off, by ignoring or diminishing the
importance of quality and its discernment by humans? Of course not.
SteveA
> On Jul 31, 2019, at 6:27 AM, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 2
Oops, "social conscience." (not conscious)
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
I misquoted Mikel Maron by saying he called Facebook's example of this AI
technology in OSM "a balance between turbocharged and exploitation." In fact,
he has told me he dislikes both terms immensely in this discussion.
I regret my error and apologize to Mike
ality of our data. Should we ever give up on
insisting that our data be as top-quality as humanly (heh) possible, we will
lose all that is good about OSM.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
; we'll get at
least something. It might be weak sauce, it might have a heavy public
relations spin on it (initially) but we've got to get the ball rolling by
bringing such conversations out into the open. Thank you for your suggestions
to facilitate this.
SteveA
> On Jul 26, 2019,
his thread, I directly apologize to Dristie for my
error. I regret my error.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
it helps, it appears that DrishT engages relatively quickly (as a
"somewhat representative member of the Facebook community working on this AI
project"). If you feel as if you are not heard (or "less than heard"), I
recently had a quick reply there ( https://www.osm.org/user/DrishT
that is much, much more open (like talk here) — truer to the spirit of OSM.
Thanks for your reply, thanks in advance for any clarification you might
further add,
SteveA
> On Aug 5, 2019, at 8:40 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I appreciate the invitation, but this is a compl
he red zone" when reading
this, perhaps it should have. Something smells absolutely terrible about this
and on many fronts. Please be cautious about everything having anything to do
with it.
Simply my opinion,
SteveA
___
talk mailing lis
eminded us "you can't fool all of the
people all of the time."
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Sure, James. I'm simply calling this as I see it here, in context, with an
appropriate audience.
SteveA
> On Jul 24, 2019, at 3:02 PM, James wrote:
>
> News outlet sensationalizes story to attract views to its website.I can't
> think of one example of this ever happening in
I would like to publicly, sincerely thank Martijn for saying that here.
SteveA
> On Jul 25, 2019, at 7:26 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>
> I did. After Drishtie Patel announced a preview of this project[1] I gave it
> a go and shared my observations with them.
> Martijn
Nicely answered, I appreciate that!
SteveA
> On Nov 8, 2019, at 4:02 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 9. Nov 2019, at 00:48, stevea wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't say "all" addresses, as Facebook isn't "all
I wouldn't say "all" addresses, as Facebook isn't "all" of us. Also, it's an
ambition, a gleam in a collective eye, a vision, something ahead in the future
as a goal. There will be, rightly, many paths to get there, rather than a
single one. This is true of any major
agree with common sense that those work are derived from OSM, even if they do
not contain OSM data in them. They contain data "helped" by OSM data, so they
are derived (I would argue).
SteveA
California
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:19 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
> I w
I don't know. I've expressed my opinion(s) on the matter, and believe the LWG
should chime in with "an" (the?) answer.
SteveA
California
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 3:27 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 15. Nov 2019, at 00:19, stevea wro
artly derived from OSM data.
This doesn't seem that difficult to do on a verbal level, though again, I'm not
sure of how it holds up legally.
SteveA
California
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:45 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> I guess the law often doesn’t work like common sense. ODbL s
for the Legal Working Group, however, I do hope
they are inspired by the strong feelings and opinions of OSM volunteers about
our data / works.
SteveA
California
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 3:09 PM, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> stevea, I would not be exactly the same person without OSM. Does
le I don't wish to diminish the light-hearted, holiday-spirited suggestion
Pierre makes, I can't help but feel it detracts from the seriousness of the
concerns expressed by Nuno. I don't think that was Pierre's intent, but it
could be easy to misinterpret his comments that way.
SteveA
things out of
things, with other people building things, too, meet-ya-in-the-wiki.
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
sy to miss, simply fix as you see them, please.
SteveA
> On Dec 22, 2019, at 6:00 PM, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk
> wrote:
> coming across bad mapping, if you draw a water feature ditch, or stream, from
> the bottom of the map
> up, you get arrows showing the flow going the wron
t
a lot of people naturally gravitate to a "non code issue" as GitHub as their
first go-to, the contradictory nature of that seems clear to me and many.
The wiki, maybe yes, maybe no, (there is wiki, there are others) but yes should
neither surprise nor annoy, nor does it.
SteveA
> On Dec 22
in lies
what we have to fix: proof by contrapositive fails, when it shouldn't
(logically), because OSM has made and does make numerous exceptions. Let's
clarify how, when and why we do this, at least as a "first cut" at how we
address this contradiction.
I hope that cl
in the absence of a
sign or other OTG evidence, how ELSE are we supposed to know what to tag
something? Please don't answer "ask locals" or "everybody just knows that" as
neither is a very good component of a "rule," as OTG claims to be (but isn't).
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
quot; I
remain (barely) in a listening mode to other suggestions, but they are
disappearing from this conversation like the light in the sky after sunset.
"It is what it is." (It's a settled matter).
SteveA
California
On Feb 25, 2020, at 11:43 AM, Mario Frasca wrote:
>
> On 25/02/2020 14:22, stevea wrote:
>> as an emerging (emerged?) consensus we seem to be leaving the names of
>> international objects in English
>
> I wish to express my disagreement.
>
> and I
I believe I speak for many, most, or even all of us here (except Tomek) that
"this is a settled matter."
SteveA
> On Feb 25, 2020, at 12:44 PM, Tomek wrote:
>
> W dniu 20-02-25 o 19:57, Maarten Deen pisze:
>> You are forcing (or are trying to) me and a lot of othe
So, rather than being fully enthusiastic about the absolute application of OTG
(we simply can't), let's realize that it is a good guideline which should be
followed where it can, yet it must include some flexibility which allows for
exceptions. I haven't seen that said (here, yet, perhaps i
On Feb 8, 2020, at 2:58 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
> On 07.02.20 20:12, stevea wrote:
>> A well-known example is (national, other) boundaries, which
>> frequently do not exist "on the ground,"
> National borders don't exist on the ground? huh? Have you ever actually
sult the source" (freely,
in all senses) to determine "what is" even (or especially) if something is NOT
on-the-ground, we actually DO largely encompass many of the exceptions of "but
I can't SEE it on the ground." We may have more work to do to be more
explicit, but t
ant that the phrasing is first vetted (here or on the Talk page)
and I do think something like this should be entered into our Good_practice
wiki to clarify OTG as we have discussed it here.
Thanks in advance for any brief review and comments / suggestions you might
offer,
SteveA
__
realistically addressed, likely in our wiki where we state the
"rule" today, though going forward much better state a "guideline". I think we
can get there, but it remains under discussion / construction.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Or, using unsigned_ref=* is an option.
SteveA
> On Feb 14, 2020, at 1:08 PM, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> > “ they don't really use numbers for roads except internally”
>
> If they do not post signs, and locals do not usually know the numbers, then
> there shoul
ces where we can do this but now do not, let's fix that so we do.
SteveA
California
> On Feb 22, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 12:49 PM Wayne Emerson, Jr. via talk
> wrote:
> The OSM World Discord server usually has people on that
of us here that your
use of Esperanto and Polish, as well as your insistence that widespread usage
of English in OSM diminish to your specification has failed to gain traction.
May we ask you quite directly to cease with this campaign of yours, please? I
agree with Alan M. that
Done:
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Talk:Good_practice#Supplementing_and_clarifying_the_On_The_Ground_.22rule.22
Follow it there, if you like.
SteveA
> On Feb 8, 2020, at 12:04 PM, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> I am in favor of this or similar language. I think for a more vote-like
>
on here and in the Good Practices
Talk page I linked earlier.
Yes, OTG has some work to do. Again, I think we can get there.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Thanks, Mikel, but may I please ask what you mean by "control boundaries?"
SteveA
> On Feb 11, 2020, at 1:36 PM, Mikel Maron wrote:
>
> btw, I think it's entirely compatible to follow On the Ground, with tagging
> that recognizes the distinction between political
That is an outstanding way to say a whole bunch of good stuff all at once. +1
is an understatement.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
h I agree suffices for what it is) and other unusual hazards
like places which have a propensity to be repeatedly struck by lightning
(that's a weird one, and kind of controversial, I know).
As before, I doubt "hazard" or "no-go" will get more tractio
speranto Club, so I know the
reasoning behind why people might want to learn the language. But I don't
believe it was ever meant to be rammed down anybody's throat. (Which is what
that felt like).
Opinions are mine.
Thanks for your understanding and peace to you,
SteveA
__
h-language list.
Peace,
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
ead consensus that OSM should not contain postal
(ZIP) code data in the USA, as ZIP codes (strictly speaking) cannot always (or
even usually?) be defined as geographic areas, they are rather better thought
of as a "routing algorithm to help facilitate mail delivery."
SteveA
at is wholly uncalled for. I sometimes say to people, "thank you
for your opinions." With you, here and now, I do not.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
will be a
compromise, but I agree that we should strive for the most appropriate access
to a culturally-appropriate solution. Great results seldom come from anything
less than serious effort. I encourage continuing work on this important
continuing development of OSM. Good dialog here is
e in our map, as I know of no other
general-purpose map (that IS how many use OSM) which identifies these sorts of
"everyday" hazards. Think about it: a hazardous situation might find YOU one
day, and you might be very glad you saw this on a map beforehand so you could
avoid it.
St
liffs are not transient at all and would likely remain as long-term
hazards.
I think we should revisit this rather than dismiss it matter-of-factly as "oh,
that hazard thing that pops its head up every year or so."
SteveA
___
talk m
-sensitive hazards on Earth. We should map and render them, but
to do so, we might resurrect a more-modern version of the hazard tag proposal.
Or anything else that would do the job. These do seem like good, smart things
to map.
Good dialog, thank you everybody.
SteveA
> On Dec 31, 2019, at 10
ve passion
or energy to go much further with it, next up, please! (Yeah).
What a great project, OSM. (I truly mean that).
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
rustrates that kind
of source data from yielding any helpful data to enter).
So, I'm at least one person who DOES say that OSM isn't a fake map, and those
are only some of the reasons why. There are plenty of other reasons and plenty
of other people who agree with me.
SteveA
California
Whoops, "I can read PO and EO, too" is what I meant to type.
See, it's this "let's not get snarled up in differing languages thing." We can
do this, we have.
It's easy to goof things up and we shouldn't.
SteveA
___
ta
r future cooperation.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
t;
May we please see posts in English (any dialect) here, please? That is, if you
wish them (widely) read, here.
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
an read PO and EN, too. Poorly. And I suppose, luckily for you.
Please abide that English, simply, ain't, isn't going away here. I speak it,
billions of us do.
We are here to make a map, largely agreeing with each other as we do.
SteveA
___
talk mailing
has some of those.
A node tagged hazard=* might work well. This feels like a rough sketch only
(still) despite getting shot down repeatedly as an unfocused or wholly wrong
idea.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
reporting and I'm sure
widely appreciated (not only me).
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
and improve
what you can. Then, our map continues to grow better (in both data and data
quality). Yes, this is a version of "perfection is the enemy of the good."
I know I walk right up to a line here of "don't put junk into our map, or stuff
that'll get crufty over time" an
lead you to places where you
might find what you're looking for.
Good luck, have fun mapping, be as gentle as you can be on OSM's servers,
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Sarah, thank you! You are really "on it!"
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
emove my sense of belonging to this mapping community, so,
the growing chant from the masses should be clear: don't do that. Changing
the rules (licensing, recognition, rights...) in the middle of the journey is
the quickest way to discourage more of us to drop o
/most/all
submissions, a link to those on Frederik's user-space page is as good a place
as any to submit these.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
ven't looked).
Guidelines (as to length) or templates (like a themed border-slide that has the
SotM 2020 logo, for example) are helpful things to add which promote
consistency, but these are not absolutely required.
Doing my best to help,
SteveA
California
> On Apr 5, 2020, at 12:
ort that gets done
"formally."
> I've added status=import and tagged a few keys which are documented:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Key_descriptions_with_status_%22import%22
> Also see update of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Approval_
; in OSM. This, too. An interesting register, this.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
re is also
information=guidepost, information=map and information=route_marker; please see
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dinformation .
SteveA
California
> On Apr 24, 2020, at 9:01 AM, 80hnhtv4a...@bk.ru wrote:
>
> if in the ID editor there are points for picnic tables, what ab
of the park is as good a place as any to enter this node,
along with a name=Park Name tag on that node.
SteveA
> On Apr 24, 2020, at 5:01 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/4/20 2:01 am, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote:
>> if in the ID editor there are po
want to tag "more correctly." (And
hasn't this been true for all of us, to some extent?!)
Thanks for reading,
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
rojects) aren't good
ideas, just that we MUST look at the whole iceberg rather than only its tip.
Usually, what appears to be is only the tip and the iceberg is bigger than one
might realize.
SteveA
> On Mar 18, 2020, at 10:37 PM, Roland Olbricht wrote:
> ..."stale": Tags that c
to "fix" (modify) data
may likely be higher-cost than the benefit of what might be determinable
directly from the data (anyway, presently).
SteveA
> On Mar 18, 2020, at 10:52 PM, stevea wrote:
>
> Even the "let's not misunderstand" posts might even contain slight
forgetting to mention... and we MIGHT be
able to better solve these issues. We can solve them, we have to be smart,
patient and knowledgable about our past, looking to the future and aware of how
things drift and evolve. That's tough, but doable.
Whew!
SteveA
> On Mar 17, 2020, at 4
/tagging schemes that
might truly improve what you attempt to improve. Doing this is complex and
deserves complex treatment, not a gloss-over and quick action.
SteveA
> On Mar 17, 2020, at 4:38 PM, stevea wrote:
>
> I would like to stress once again how easily it is for intended
munity
expects and can participate in improving, the volume knob here can be turned
down as these discussions don't have to be quite so public).
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
mprovement" is itself correctly a near-constant process.
Whether at the level of individual contributor or corporate behemoth, such
wider scrutiny in a project like OSM should be par for the course (expected,
"business as usual").
SteveA
California
y blunders, so
avoid these! Finally, when in doubt, seek consensus: plenty of community
wants to help make a better map, but only with agreement does that happen.
SteveA
> On Fri., Sep. 11, 2020, 3:56 p.m. Michał Brzozowski,
> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Do we have any examples of compani
y the OSMF's OWG.
While the latter seems unrelated, the former still remains quite vague to me
and I suspect most readers of this list. If you are going to write about this
more here, can you please present a clear technical specification (tech spec)
of what you wish to see b
s database
model, he simply sent us a link to it (which we can find ourselves, but thanks
for the effort).
pangoSE: please stop ignoring me in these threads. I'm extending effort to
listen, your lack of reply seems disingenuous.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
ne, others in OSM) data.
Yea: let's get this ball rolling and a proper OSM attribution!
SteveA
California
> On Aug 19, 2020, at 2:44 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
> Hey Mike,
> They definitely mention OSM, even call us a partner [1] but like you found
> their basemap is definitely OSM.
remains MY turn to ask YOU, pangoSE): What do YOU think?" (about my
longer-term approach and four-point post). Can we get YOUR feedback to THAT
reply?
Let's not talk "past" each other, let's talk "to" each other.
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
uot;No." I don't see the merit (again echoing Frederick). While
I'm only one person and one vote and perhaps a bit more vocal than most, I feel
it important to express the opinion of "very strongly against."
SteveA
___
talk maili
Please click on the "View History" link of the wiki page (upper right) to see
the contributors to this wiki (there are ten).
You can click on their username links to contact them.
SteveA
> On Aug 2, 2020, at 8:25 AM, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk
> wrote:
> Did someone on th
confusing, it seems to be more trouble than it is
worth and I feel it would chase away novice volunteers as "too complex." The
consensus, with the exception of the proposer, seems 100% in line with my
opinions. I do welcome more discussion, that's why we type here.
SteveA
> On
ediately realize benefits.
There: I think I've tilled the soil a bit, and if pangoSE or somebody wants to
plant seeds (again), I'd read #2 above and think much longer-term. OSM could
do this, but it's going to take more than a thread on Talk and a wad tossed
against a wall. And maybe a decade or two.
St
On Jul 26, 2020, at 12:12 PM, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
> On July 26, 2020 14:56:39 stevea wrote:
>> I speculate (a bit, though I am a seasoned software quality assurance
>> analyst), but I lean heavily towards Skyler's specific environment of a
>> OnePlus mobile devic
r you were running with
this screen shot?
Thanks,
SteveA
> On Jul 26, 2020, at 11:46 AM, Mateusz Konieczny via talk
> wrote:
>
> Can you try viewing it in the desktop
> mode or on a laptop/other full sized screen?
>
> Maybe mobile version is broken.
>
>
> 26
. If, on the
other hand, you are certain that _individual_ tracks are clearly wrong, I'd say
go ahead and change those one-at-a-time, but a wholesale revert, no, that seems
like overkill.
SteveA
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https
assing. Ridiculous. Maps don't
make people choose to break the law, people do. I set him straight and we get
along fine.
SteveA
California
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
for what it is)
find this behavior of yours highly suspect.
I apologize to the list for going into the deeper and darker aspects of human
behavior here. Sometimes, it is required to do so.
SteveA
On Dec 3, 2020, at 3:32 AM, Mikel Maron wrote:
> Thanks Mateusz, I agree. Points can easily be m
recently replying and (at first, generally) sticking to topics, the one-line
"zinger" he ends with that I quote above rather rudely wipes all the nice
pieces off the board, subtracting far, far more than his one, single point.
So, really,
1 - 100 of 961 matches
Mail list logo
