On 11-Feb-17 07:42 AM, Brian Prangle wrote:
I've removed the offending tags from areas I know well,having walked
them off and on for 30 years,i.e Snowdon massif, Glyders and Berwyns.
I've left the poylgons suitably commented.
Regards
Brian
On 9 February 2017 at 10:10, SK53 <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Despite the problems of these edits (incorrect tagging, bad
polygons) more than anything they reflect that OSM as a project
lacks good tags for many of these boreo-temperate upland features,
and whilst that is true there will be always be someone abusing
existing tags. I think most mappers remember the initial thrill of
seeing changes come through on the main map style: for some people
it's probably still a primary motivator.
I therefore think Brian's suggestions of working collectively to
map these areas better together with a more in-depth consideration
of the relevant tagging is the way to go: and
landuse=unimproved_grassland at the very least has the advantage
of being correct.
Correct? Possibly in the present conceptual mess of OSM 'landuse'
(amongst others).
To me, "landuse' should be the human use to which the land is put. And
'unimproved_grassland' is not a use to me, 'wilderness' might be
substitute for 'unused' or 'unusable'?
I think that the tag 'landcover' is far better to use for tagging the
plants that cover the land.
I have compared several location in Wales with my own photographs
and the former CCW Phase 1 Habitat shape file, and acidic or
neutral unimproved grassland is the classification of the majority
of these locations. (I'm not sure of the status of this latter
data: my copy is for private use only, but if it was released as
Open Data it would be very useful. One word of caution the data
was compiled over a long period and in some places will be
out-of-date.)
I'm always reluctant to delete stuff from OSM, unless it can be
replaced by something better. Grassland tagging is a mess in OSM:
let's use this as an opportunity to improve it for OSM in the UK.
One last thing: I'm not very keen on calling people out on a
public mailing list. The nature of OSM is that one knows nothing
of many mappers (Frederik talked about this at SotM-14): there is
always a risk of doing more than hurting their feelings.
In soccer (football to some) the saying is "Play the ball, not the man."
Regards,
Jerry
On 8 February 2017 at 21:46, Brian Prangle <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I came across glucosamine during the farmyards quarterly
projectwhere she/he'd tagged place=farm to every group of
isolated buildings all over Herefordshire. I think he/she
means well just misinterprets tagging conventions and then
rolls on regardless.
Might we tackle this task under the general heading either of
"landuse fixes" or "uplands" as our next quarterly project?
That gives us some time to discuss approaches, conventions ,
progress tools etc so that we can hit the ground running so to
speak on day 1
Regards
Brian
On 8 February 2017 at 21:35, Richard Fairhurst
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Marco Boeringa wrote:
> 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.
Thanks for the detective work and for persisting with this.
I think it's very unlikely, however, that these users are
editing OSM for a
company. Probably the majority of edits in the UK are done
by what you might
call "lone mappers". Generally this works well and people
plough their own
furrows successfully, happily modifying their practice if
particular issues
are pointed out to them. But occasionally we have people
who (perhaps
because of limited social skills) find it difficult to
follow established
practice and co-operate with other contributors. There
have been several
examples in the past and I'm sure many regulars here will
be aware of a few
of them.
That's what I think we have here. I have no knowledge as
to whether
Glucosamine, Dyserth and Sam888 are the same person or not
- it wouldn't
surprise me either way. But they/he very much fit the
"uncommunicative lone
mapper" model.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Large-swaths-of-heath-in-Wales-tp5890778p5890908.html
<http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Large-swaths-of-heath-in-Wales-tp5890778p5890908.html>
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
