OpenStreetMap

Little Brother has commented on the following diary entries

Post When Comment
Categorising paths 15 days ago

Hello Rostranimin. Thanks for the reply. I can understand now that such information may be of importance to the mapmaker providing a specific map for a specific purpose, e.g. wheelchair users.

So I am not contra your proposal but I myself would not contribute any of your suggested attributes to the database. That is purely the case because I cannot see any usage for them in my areas of influence.

I wish you luck with your proposed feature.

Categorising paths 18 days ago

I sometimes think that we overdo our contributions so allow me to say why:

I am 75 years old and am still rambling around collecting data for OSM: It gives me something sensible to do as my wife does the housework and gardening.

Can you remember paper maps (such as Ordnance Survey)?

How were path attributes in these paper maps describe?

Answer: Mostly, not at all!

I assume that I am writing this for ramblers that regularly walk through fields, forests, etc. I do so 2-3 times a week and all I do in addition to picking a route and a restaurant (OSM in its present form fulfills these specifications admirably) is to consider the present weather conditions and the rainfall of the past few days and equip myself accordingly.

So I ask you:

Do you really think that hikers will look for the path attributes that you have suggested when planing their tour?

IMHO the only attribute that is required and then only in geographical areas where it is required is the SAC SCALE.

The wheelchair=no should be a default for paths and therefore not necessary.

NOTE:

I know that we have the combination highway=path / foot=designated / bicycle=designated

which I don't like.

Why not highway=footway / bicycle=designated / segregated=yes/no?

I quite understand that others contributors will disagree with me, so I ask the following question:

What do the users of OSM data think?

Categorising paths 18 days ago

I sometimes think that we overdo our contributions so allow to say why:

I am 75 years old and am still rambling around collecting data for OSM: It gives me something sensible to do as my wife does the housework and gardening.

Can you remember paper maps (such as Ordnance Survey)?

How were path attributes in these paper maps describe?

Answer: Mostly, not at all!

I assume that I am writing this for ramblers that regularly walk through fields, forests, etc. I do so 2-3 times a week and all I do in addition to picking a route and a restaurant (OSM in its present form fulfills these specifications admirably) is to consider the present weather conditions and the rainfall of the past few days and equip myself accordingly.

So I ask you:

Do you really think that hikers will look for the path attributes that you have suggested when planing their tour?

IMHO the only attribute that is required and then only in geographical areas where it is required is the SAC SCALE.

The wheelchair=no should be a default for paths and therefore not necessary.

NOTE:

I know that we have the combination highway=path / foot=designated / bicycle=designated

which I don't like.

Why not highway=footway / bicycle=designated / segregated=yes/no?

I quite understand that others contributors will disagree with me, so I ask the following question:

What do the users of OSM data think?

Hi Dear Friend Plz Read 18 days ago

Spam: Eliminate

Learn-a-tag: highway=escape 3 months ago

I hope I am not being to cynical by pointing out that the tag will probably never be used. Can you imagine any driver careering down a hill with no brakes and looking at any map for an escape lane. However, having now been cynical, it is part of the highway system so it should be mapped. Well done for pointing out this highway feature!

From the "steps to happiness series": thanking 5 months ago

I am not quite sure whether you complaing or are really thankful for these deficits.

Single object changesets. Some edits are done by people on the go. e.g. They go to a venue, note the attributes and just add it to the data base: Nothing wrong there! Some people correct the data using OSMI: Better here to upload one correcton at a time in case the new entry is wrong and has to be reversed.

Objects only with name. Is it not better to have this data which can then be improved upon by a user with local knowledge. I agree a note would be better but that is not the issue here.

Changesets without comments. I think comments should be mandatory. Is that what you want?

In JOSM you cannot delete a relation without a warning: I don't know about other editors! I can see your point on modifying relations (and multipolygons), however. An alert would be nice.