I would personally prefer it if a certain bit of software said "GPX traces" or similar for the public traces rather than "survey" when autofilling sources, but I never remember to raise it in the bug tracker.
On Tue, 10 Mar 2020, 18:09 Volker Schmidt, <[email protected]> wrote: > My personal approach: when I map I routinely use three sources in > parallel: survey, GPX track, Mapillary images, satellite photos (picking > the one with the most up-to -date pictures in the area, and aligning them > to the Italian PCN2006 pictures, which are by our experience the > best-aligned pictures available here). > As a consequence (I am not always consistent, to be honest) I would have > something like "source=survey; GPX tracks; Mapillary; Esri Images aligned > with PCN2006" > But my mapping is often not anything near to armchair mapping, I am using > the images in addition to the other tools. > I would not consider the fact that sattellite images are used, on its own > as an indication that the date need to taken with caution. > > > On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 15:54, Sören Reinecke <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Yes, I thought also about this and planned it to integrate in my concept. >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Announcing Daylight Map Distribution >> From: Joseph Eisenberg >> To: Sören Reinecke >> CC: Volker Schmidt ,[email protected] >> >> >> My understanding is that the common way to describe armchair mapping, >> based on aerial imagery, is to identify the imagery source. So I often >> write: >> >> Changeset Comment: "Added and adjusted streams and rivers near Oksibil >> with ESRI" >> Changeset Source: "Esri world imagery" >> >> This makes it clear that I used Esri imagery to map the streams and >> rivers, right? >> >> - Joseph Eisenberg >> >> On 3/10/20, Sören Reinecke via talk wrote: >> > Hey >> > >> > some ideas about identifying such changes: >> > >> > >> > Example changeset comment where a mapper did armchair mapping: >> > Data updated, added amenity=restaurant >> > #armchair >> > >> > In addition if the mapper works for a company: >> > # >> > e.g. #facebook >> > #amazon >> > #microsoft >> > #apple >> > >> > Example changeset comment where a mapper did a survey and added data as >> > (s)he saw it (from the ground): >> > #survey >> > >> > >> > >> > This way we can organize our changes and Facebook and other companies >> and >> > the community as well know how to validate and can distinguish >> changesets >> > from another. I could create a wikipage where we think about this >> "changeset >> > governance" >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram >> > >> > >> > -------- Original Message -------- >> > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Announcing Daylight Map Distribution >> > From: Volker Schmidt >> > To: [email protected] >> > CC: >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> Fixing stuff in OSM purely from imagery may not be good. >> >>> >> >>> A local mapper who sees something may add it before any satellite >> imagery >> >>> has it. >> >>> >> >>> If you then 'fix' this back to the satellite imagery you will have >> >>> committed an error, >> >>> and that error may dissuade our most important resource from ever >> making >> >>> any further changes- the local mapper. >> >>> >> >>> Be very careful! >> >> >> >> >> >> I second this last line ! >> >> >> >> I am observing an influx of mixed-quality remote edits from Amazon >> >> Logistics in my area. >> >> I expect this Facebook operation to produce much more changes or >> potential >> >> changes (=suspected errors). >> >> What we need for both cases and similar ones in the future is a way of >> >> being able to identify such changes, which by their nature will be >> >> armchair-mapping efforts. >> >> I do not have a specific proposal, but I would appreciate a tool that >> >> helps me, as local mapper, find these edits, and, more importantly we >> >> need a new approach to organise digesting these massive distributed >> >> armchair-mapping interventions on OSM data. >> >> I don't realistically think that banning these activities is good for >> OSM. >> >> Not dealing in a systematic way with it at all presents, however, a big >> >> risk of deteriorating the map for two reasons: >> >> (1) bad armchair edits by Amazon and Facebook (and others) >> >> (2) demotivating non-armchair mappers >> >> >> >> I repeat I do not have a proposal how to handle that. My main concern >> is >> >> that the required work for locally checking even only those edits that >> >> need checking (I am assuming that at least FB has good algorithms to >> sort >> >> out the dead-certain corrections beforehand. I am more sceptical with >> >> Amazon's changing local access tagging to, essentially, "yes" >> everywhere >> >> they have delivered something by delivery van. I came across a good >> number >> >> of them, and in most cases they were at least dubious) >> >> >> >> Volker >> >> (Padova, Italy) >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
