On 29/07/2019 09:35, Andy Robinson wrote:
I've just looked at a number of Amazon Logistics in my local area....
Just to give everyone a bit of a heads-up about the DWG's involvement
here - we got a number of messages about Amazon's mapping. The biggest
immediate problem was their use of "motor_vehicle=yes" on
"highway=track" regardless of the actual legal access status. To cut a
long story short, they have removed this where they've blanket added it,
and have since asked exactly how to map sort of thing (at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jguthula/diary/390322 and elsewhere).
The list of Amazon editors is quite long -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amazon_Logistics#Editors - and not
all are active in the UK. I used overpass queries like
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Lea to check the edits. With regard to the
"motor_vehicle=yes" issue, I contacted each of the Amazon mappers active
in the UK individually rather than going through a "manager" to try and
get them talking to the local community. In order to get from edits
there to changeset discussion comments, click on an object on that map,
then on the changeset, then "changeset XML" and copy the "uid=" value
and use it in a URL such as
resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=9310279 .
One other issue that people have raised with these edits have been
"adding connectivity where there isn't any public connectivity" (i.e.
adding a "highway=service" or "highway=track" that is in reality a
private farm track, that connects two public roads). Personally I
wouldn't assume that either of these had public access in England and
Wales* (Scotland has a different legal system), and I don't think that
we can blame Amazon for adding missing geometry but only some missing
tags. Local mappers will still be needed to add these. Amazon editors
tend to have their own "local area" so a variation of the overpass query
above can be used to identify newly added objects - I'm sure that some
people will be able to use local knowledge to say "well obviously way
XYZ should be access=private" and similar.
While looking at these issues I did notice quite a few other tracks and
rural service roads (driveways etc.) where the access tags looked a bit
unlikely - and there are of course many examples were designations
haven't been added (where that isn't open data, that needs survey). I
notice that someone from the National Trust has written a diary entry
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/AJW92/diary/390378 to discuss how to
tag England and Wales "rights of way" designations.
Best Regards,
Andy (from the DWG)
* I'd suggest that it's also not correct to tag "access=private" on
newly traced farm etc. tracks - if the example above
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/120277748 is a "byway open to all
traffic" then access=yes or motor_vehicle=yes on there will be correct,
and "private" would be wrong (TROs notwithstanding).
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
