I think the issue is not a technical one, but an intent - the system creator wanted to prevent folks from changing their comments after they were made to prevent all kinds of communication-related issues…

Nope. I added the function to edit diary entries back in 2008: https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/commit/3b6d2c5336eac35912909c9102c77bf6472901e6 . I didn’t add the function to edit diary comments simply because I didn’t get round to it. If someone else made a good-quality PR for it I’m sure it would be accepted.

Was it really the goal of the license creators to use work of hundreds of thousands of volunteers to increase wealth of companies like Apple or Facebook?

It was expressly the desire of OSM’s founder and those who worked on it in the early days to allow corporate use, yes. Otherwise it would have started with the CC-BY-NC licence rather than CC-BY-SA.

I do not see a way that would allow me to edit a comment…

Maybe you could pay someone to add that feature to osm.org ;)

Entirely personal datapoint but I’ve never been keen on “hub” - it’s a very inward-facing word (“this is our organisational structure”) rather than outward-facing (“this is what we can do for you”).

But that might be because I’m used to the cycling world where everything is called “hub” for the obvious pun value…

“HOT Maps Asia Pacific” could work, I think. And there’s a nice interplay between the words there - “maps” as noun and verb, “hot” as proper noun and adjective.

That’s outstanding. 🎉

If we want freedom for our projects, freedom for people to contribute to it, freedom from platforms monetizing our data, behavior and personal/professional networks, we need to do something, to move, to create alternatives

I’m not convinced that, as a project, we do.

“OpenStreetMap is an initiative to create and provide free geographic data, such as street maps, to anyone.” (First sentence of the OSM Foundation homepage.) “Welcome to OpenStreetMap, the project that creates and distributes free geographic data for the world.” (First sentence of the OSM wiki.)

If we can do that and use open-source software then that’s great. But our mission is open geographic data, not open-source software. If our developers find Github helps them build tools for open geographic data more effectively than Gitlab does; or if self-hosting Gitlab would divert our sysadmins from the core geodata hosting; or if paying for a third-party Gitlab install would divert funds from geodata initiatives; then we should stick with Github.

Not yet but it’s a high priority for future work.

Really sorry to hear that. I’ve noticed your edits a lot while fixing up old TIGER data and have always been impressed with your dedication. Take care.

Brilliant - thanks for that info. I pushed a couple of small optimisations this morning which I hoped would improve rendering speed - good to know that they’ve made a difference.

I’ve encountered the missing parts of the map issue once or twice before… will see if i can find out what’s causing it. Good idea on build information - I’ll do that.

Hm, interesting. Is that in a situation where P2 would cope? At (say) z16 for London then it’ll struggle, whereas at z19 it’d be fine. There are things I’d like to do in the future to optimise it but for now the focus is parity really.

Indeed!

That’s interesting - thanks mmd. I suspect there will be lots of ways to get it not to install, I’m just hoping that someone has the perseverance to find a way that it will install. :)

Agree with all of this.

With my cycle.travel hat on, it is really troublesome when people map EuroVelo routes which are not yet signposted and may go down unsuitable roads/tracks - too busy, too rough, or sometimes actually forbidden to bikes. It screws up routing and cartography something chronic. If they’re mapped with state=proposed then i don’t object too much but, as you say, often for copyright reasons they shouldn’t be added at all.

@nickjohnston: the maps are fine, NLS have said to OSM that they’re keen for us to use their scans. Besides that, there’s no basis in British law for asserting a “thin copyright” on derived information purely because you’ve copyrighted the scans themselves - indeed, it’s even debatable whether faithful scans pass the threshold to be copyrighted in the first place (the IPO now appears to be of the opinion they don’t).

OSM iterates towards completeness. This has been the case since the first days of the project.

You don’t have to map everything to 100% levels of detail to begin with. It’s absolutely fine to map something at reduced detail, and then people will come along and refine it over time. That’s how OSM has always worked.

And it generates additional datasets /changesets, what is inflating our data base also unnecessary.

This is a canard. The impact on the database is trivial and the sysadmins are more than equal to the task of maintaining it.

@aeonesa There is absolutely no need to be so offensive.

we need a general tagging scheme in place for county, state, and non-designated

Please make sure that you make sure that unpaved roads/tracks are clearly distinguishable as such. (In other words, highway=residential/unclassified/etc. should always have a surface tag if they’re not paved.) Florida is currently one of the best states for this and it would be a shame to lose that.

Though a route planning map that visually indicates road surface would be really nice

cough

https://cycle.travel/map

I wouldn’t bother tagging Carphone Warehouses within Currys PC World at all, other than perhaps an additional shop=mobile_phone node. We don’t tag their KnowHow repair brand separately, after all. (Similarly, Morrisons call their fresh produce section “Market Street” yet we don’t tag it separately.)

And in cycle.travel: https://cycle.travel/map?lat=47.1939&lon=14.744&zoom=13

…including the turn-by-turn directions: https://cycle.travel/map?from=47.177,14.686&to=47.1599,14.7605

@n76 You’re welcome to do so, but bear in mind that an MTB trail tagged simply with ‘highway=path, bicycle=yes’ is completely indistinguishable (to routers and other clients) from the thousands of km of French voie verte already tagged that way - even though the cycling experience is very, very different.