Hi all,
I now had a very preliminary and short look at some of the changesets
involved in the Wales area, which was revealing. I now noticed most of
these features seem to have been added by multiple users / accounts:
- Sam888, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413378224
- Glucosamine: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405845733
- Dyserth: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388818928
There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost no
changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems to me these
are editors working professionally for some OSM related company.
Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to identify
natural features?
There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also
see being part of these changesets.
I have the feeling the most offending stuff is primarily the false
natural=heath. So maybe it is a better course of action to select the
heath features in the affected regions in JOSM, and delete only those in
a new changeset. I think this is by far the easiest solution. Of course,
a bit of caution and review will be required to not include properly
digitized heath features by regular OSM users.
Any other ideas?
Marco
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:09:24 +0000
From: ael <law_ence....@ntlworld.com>
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?
Message-ID: <20170208130924.wdbn72h2r6rk7n6f@shelf.conquest>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +0000, Andy Townsend wrote:
On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
actually decided to act on our discussions.
I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
something like that was going to happen.
As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
although I was sure they were wrong.
In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
bulkish reversion.
ael
---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
