Recent diary entries
Trying to improve the commitment of new mappers and to help them overcome the obvious beginners problems when trying to map, the Dutch community (after discussion in the user-forum) started to welcome new mappers as soon as they had made their first edit (in the Netherlands) on the map. To find out who the new mappers were, I used this rss-feed, provided by Pascal Neis.
This welcome program started on the 1st of August of 2015 and continues to this day. It is run by me and as such is a one-man task.
During this process I became curious to the mapping behaviour of the mappers and started to collect some data about their activity:
- when did they start their user account?
- when did they start to map?
- how many edits did they do?
- and much more
Soon I realized that I needed more data (over a longer time span) to get a better insight and so I contacted Pascal Neis and asked him to provide me with the relevant data, dating from some years back. After some startup problems with the data - not all the mappers seemed to be present in the data - I started my research with a dataset that contained the following data:
- date of registration
- date of first edit in the Netherlands
- date of their latest edit
- number of changesets
The dataset I have used for my research contained 3205 mappers that have done a first edit in the Netherlands between 1-1-2014 and 29-1-2016.
On first inspection of the data, it surprised me to see that some mappers did their first edit 7 years after they had created an account! This, then, was the first thing to investigate: how many days (after registration) pass before the first changeset is created?
Next I investigated how many days passed before the mapper did his latest (and very often his last) edit.
We see that most mappers (77%) create an account and start to map immediately, but 4% of the mappers waited more than 3 years before they did a first edit. But it is striking to see that for almost all of those mappers (68%) this first edit is also their last! So called "hit-and-run" mappers.
"Last edit" is of course hard to tell, because they might return some day in the future and do another edit, but experience so far doesn't prove that.
Of course it is difficult to draw conclusions based on a rather small dataset, but it nevertheless looks not to far from truth to conclude that OSM mapping is basically in the hands of a small group of dedicated persons.
When are you a regular mapper?
If I look at my own status, I have got the label: "a crazy mapper", whatever that means, but once every three days (on average) I'm mapping: adding new things, fixing errors, searching for errors etc. But even if you add/change/correct things once every three months, you're a regular mapper.
The number of days since your last edit is a good measure of your status. See the next table:
This table shows that 138 mappers (4%) did edit something but did not return for a period of more than 730 days (2 years) after this edit. This is the maximum my dataset can reveal (because it spans 2 years and one month), and it is possible that some of those mappers will return in the future, but it is not very likely.
1411 mappers (44%) did their latest edit more than 1 year ago and still another 25% of the mappers did not return to mapping within (at least) 6 months.
One might say that for the majority of the mappers it is a one-time-only affair. Probably fixing something in their own area (missing names, shops, houses etc) and then never return.
A good measure of your mapping activity is the number of changesets you have done, and that is what is in the next table.
(Showing # changesets, # mappers in numbers and as %, sum of group left to it.)
This table shows:
1225 mappers did create 1 changeset
10 mappers did create (each!) more than 1000 changesets
And 82% of the mappers created between 1-9 changesets. From the graph it is obvious that this is almost a perfect example of an exponential curve.
In the Netherlands we have an active (albeit small) community of mappers and there is no indication that this community is different (statistically) from the complete set (2 000 000+) of OSM mappers (see links below), but it is also clear that the results that we get from the different datasets are not always easy to understand and only after at least one more year we might get some results that show us if the welcome program that we run in the Netherlands has improved the participation of the Dutch mappers!
Doy por finalizado el mapeo sistemático de carreteras y caminos rurales en el municipio de Puenteareas (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puenteareas).
Aparte de trazar los que no estaban, he corregido el curso de numerosas vías existentes, incluso varias ediciones mías previas, aprovechando la actualización de las fotos aéreas y la comprobación sobre el terreno, en algunos casos.
No he intervenido en el casco urbano de la capital.
Debido al abandono en general del campo, muchos caminos van quedando impracticables; además, en varios montes se están llevando a cabo replantaciones forestales, creando, variando o eliminando pistas. Estos hechos harán que los datos queden obsoletos, siendo necesarias revisiones de vez en cuando.
In the wake of a serious act of driver brutality against a cyclist, in which the police were unable to specifically prosecute, I feel that it is not safe to cycle in the UK today, because the infrastructure that is required to enable safe cycling without a helmet or any of that extraneous gear is either not there, or it is at best too piecemeal to be considered "safe".
Having surveyed London streets for OSM, it is unsurprising that the London Cycle Network and its signage is far too piecemeal to enable safe cycling without a helmet or any of that extraneous gear: there cycling in the UK is not user-friendly but instead like playing Russian Roulette. It is unsurprising that Netherlands is so ahead of us in the provision of cycling infrastructure, to a point where helmets and other extraneous gear are a mere sports thing over there.
Therefore, I think that in the UK, the car and the bus is still the king. With all the aggression against cyclists in the UK (just look at all those videos on YouTube!), this is why I feel that it is not safe to cycle in Britain at all, and non-drivers may be better of with public transport, until the government provides the right infrastructure so that cycling is no longer like playing Russian Roulette.
Ciao, ho deciso che comincio a mappare gli edifici e le aree verdi di Grotte Santo Stefano: il paese di mio padre. Luca
I planned to use OSM data for a transport oriented project for the city of Kolkata, India. I started few months back to find that there are large unmapped areas in OSM within the city itself. Also the mapping community activities have slowed down in last couple of years. I would like to call all mapping enthusiasts of Kolkata to join hands to ramp up the Mapping Quotient of the City of Joy effectively. Together we can make a difference. Please contact me on following handles : Twitter : @jeet_sen LinkedIn : Suvajit Sengupta Email : firstname.lastname@example.org
I've been a member of OSM for just under 2 years and I suppose I ought to start using this diary.
Project Map Pinedale
For the past few months, the majority of my activity has been targeted at the town of Pinedale, Wyoming, United States. This was (and still is) a very under-mapped town by most standards. So far, I have been able to map the majority of the businesses & buildings on main street (Pine Street). The remainder of the town on the map is almost exclusively roads at this point with some scattered buildings.
My personal goal for the next few months will be to map every major building (basically everything with the exception of some outbuildings, sheds, etc). Besides merely creating building outlines, I would like to tag each building with its proper address and any other information I can gather on it. Additionally, I will improve road mappings as I notice deficiencies. Ideally, I will be able to accomplish all this by the end of August.
I will try to continue adding to my diary with status updates & possibly projected end-dates for this project.
On the odd chance someone else sees this entry & would like to contribute to this project, I would love to hear from you!
In den Monaten November und Dezember war ich ziemlich untätig bzgl. meiner Auswertungen. Im Januar habe ich wieder mehr Zeit investiert und einiges produktiv gestellt, das ich hier grob darstellen möchte.
Neu: Prüfung der Distanz zwischen OSM-Hausnummern und offiziellen Geokoordinaten
Direkt erstmal der große Dämpfer in Deutschland: es gibt nur wenige Gemeinden, die Hausnummerlisten mit Geokoordinaten zur freien Nutzung bereitgestellt haben. Nur dann ist die folgende Funktion verfügbar, z.B. in Berlin, Köln, Würzburg und Freiberg. Für die ganzen sächsischen Gemeinden werde ich die Funktion demnächst aktivieren.
Bei den entsprechenden Gemeinden gibt es auf der Auswertungsseite den zusätzlichen Link "vergleichen mit offiziellen Geokoordinaten" (siehe z.B. Freiberg). Es wird dann eine zweiteilige Seite angezeigt, auf der links die Hausnummern mit den größten Distanzen zwischen der OSM-Position und der offiziellen Position aufgelistet werden. Nach dem Klick auf den Link "Karte" werden Soll- und OSM-Ist-Position rechts auf der Karte angezeigt, mit Klick auf "Josm" wird der Bereich im Editor geöffnet.
Distanzen von mehr als 50m können, müssen aber nicht, auf echte Fehler hinweisen. Meist ist dann bei der OSM Adresse die falsche Straße angegeben, oder die offizielle Koordinate ist räumlich nahe an der Straße, während die OSM-Adresse an einem Gebäude auf dem Grundstück (z.B. in einem Schrebergarten) angegeben ist.
Ich hoffe, diese Auswertung hilft, den einen oder anderen Fehler zu finden. Die Funktionalität wurde vom OSM-User malenki angeregt, vielen Dank dafür!
Die Nominatim-Suche geht wieder. Leider hatte ich nicht mitbekommen, das dort der Service auf https umgestellt wurde.
Manchmal hängt sich die Auswertung auf und wird blockiert, bis ich das herausfinde oder jemand mich darauf hinweist. Jetzt wird eine Blockade erkannt, sodaß der Ausfall nur kurz besteht.
Beim Import von Hausnummerlisten wird jetzt immer die Postleitzahl mit importiert, wenn vorhanden. Das erfolgte früher nur für andere Länder, wenn dort die PLZ unbedingt für den Abgleich erforderlich war.
In Deutschland vorerst nur für Köln habe ich testweise neben der normalen Auswertung von Straße und Hausnummer zusätzlich die Postleitzahl mit einbezogen. In Köln gibt es relativ viele gleichnamige Straßen. Die neue Funktionalität der Distanzprüfung machte das ziemlich auffällig und so habe ich die Auswertung hier erweitert. Im Laufe der nächsten Wochen werden andere Gemeinden folgen, dazu muss ich nochmal alle Hausnummerlisten sichten und einige neu importieren.
Gemeinden, bei denen Geokoordinaten vorliegen, werden jetzt stadtteilbezogen besser ausgewertet. Die offiziellen Geokoordinaten werden verwendet, um eine stadtteilbezogene Sollliste zu erstellen, dadurch wird genau auswertbar, welche fehlenden Hausnummern auch wirklich in diesem Stadtteil sein müssen.
Es sind weitere, kleine Anpassungen/Verbesserungen durchgeführt worden.
Experimente in der Oberfläche - Feedback erwünscht
Die Gemeindeauswahlseite war bisher eine superlange Seite und die Suche nach der wünschten Gemeinde war umständlich. Das soll jetzt einfacher sein, indem je Land nur noch die nächste Ebene (in Deutschland die Bundesländer) direkt angezeigt wird und die tiefere Ebene aufklappbar ist. Außerdem gibt es eine seiteninterne Suche. Leider wird dann nur zum passenden Bundesland gesprungen, das Aufklappen bis zur Gemeinde will ich natürlich noch hinbekommen.
Ist eine Gemeinde ausgewählt worden, gibt es auf der Folgeseite, hier Freiberg wie bisher etliche Optionen für die eigentliche Auswertungsseite. Neu ist hier nur, das für die Optionen jeweils ein Tooltip angezeigt wird, damit die ganzen Einstellmöglichkeiten besser erläutert werden.
Beide Anpassungen habe ich erstmal nur auf diesen Seiten durchgeführt, um Feedback zu erhalten, ob diese Benutzung besser oder schlechter als vorher angesehen werden.
Monatliche theoretische Hausnummerauswertung
Die Sonderauswertung für Januar ist fertig.
Ab jetzt gibt es in der Kartendarstellung auch im Fall des ausgwählten Layers "Änderungen der Anzahl Hausnummern" die Möglichkeit, auf eine Gemeinde zu klicken, um die Infos dazu zu erhalten. Vorher war bei diesem Layer kein Anlicken möglich.
Potsdam ist die einzige Gemeinde in Deutschland, die von sich aus zweimal im Jahr eine aktualisierte Hausnummerliste zuschickt, Troisdorf hat mir auch schon mal ein Update geschickt, vielen Dank! Es gibt auch schon vereinzelt User, die Updates anfordern. Ich importiere diese natürlich gerne.
In diesem Zusammenhang eine Bitte an Interessierte: bitte fragt bei Eurer Gemeinde nach einer Hausnummerliste oder einer Aktualisierung! In einer Gemeinde mit OpenData-Portal bitte auch nachsehen, ob dort eine Liste oder ein Update zu einer bestehenden verfügbar ist und mich informieren.
Der Server ist zeitweise sehr ausgelastet und in seltenen Fällen hing auch der gesamte Auswertungsprozess. Deshalb habe ich sowohl für mich selbst als auch für andere Technikverliebte Munin auf dem Server aktiviert und neben den normalen Auswertungen habe ich für die Hausnummerauswertung eine Grafik ergänzt. Es kommt voraussichtlich noch eine für die Straßenlistenauswertung hinzu.
Gerade in Deutschland gibt es Hausnummerlisten, die Geokoordinaten enthalten, die wir aber nicht direkt importieren dürfen, also nur für den Abgleich bereitgestellt wurden. Die beschränkte Bereitstellung wird noch nicht berücksichtigt, u.a., um unzulässige direkte Importe in OSM zu unterdrücken. Die Koordinaten sollen in Zukunft aber in den Funktionen berücksichtigt werden, wo sie zulässig genutzt werden dürfen. Das wird u.a. in Sachsen Verbesserungen bringen.
Es gibt Sonderfälle in den bereitgestellten Hausnummerlisten oder Auswertungsparameter, die bisher nur je Land eingestellt werden können. Das soll auf Gemeindeebene einstellbar werden und dadurch werden in Einzelfällen bessere Auswertungen möglich werden.
Ich freue mich über Verbesserungsvorschläge oder Hinweise zu bestehenden Fehlern und will diese besser und schneller unterstützen, als ich dies in der Vergangenheit gemacht habe.
Recent question of some person, who uses maps for Garmin navigation devices, derived from OSM data, brought up a good example of tagging for navigator. He was dissatisfied by his Garmin navigator (actually, BMW branded Nav V) making straight routes instead of turn-by-turn ones in case, when destination is somewhere in the end of private road, tagged with
access=private. He acknowledged, that Garmin Basecamp software works okay with the same map. Then he asked about proper way to tag roads, say, in suburban residential areas, where access is limited by locked lift gate, and where only residents have a key.
Several OSM contributors told him, that it is enough to put a
barrier=lift_gate node on that way and to tag this node with
access=private. Wiki suggests this as some sort of "intermediate" or "minimal" tagging method too (and obviously, it doesn't call it a "bad practice"). And it will help to avoid that issue of Garmin routing. But is it right and consistent?
access= key is intended to tell us, that access to tagged object is limited (or, otherwise, granted). So, tagging a lift gate with
access=private literally means "this is a private lift gate", which only partially makes sense, since you still can approach it, but you can't operate (open) it.
Second, access regime of road is not necessarily created by physical barrier such as lift gate. It could have a sign. Or just a note. Or it could be limited by law. It means, we can't eliminate adding limited access tag to
highway-tagged way itself completely, in any situation. Therefore, it makes that scheme with
access=* on a barrier node obviously inconsistent.
Third, having some limited amount of data in bounding box around the point with
access=*, it is impossible (without any additional tag, which should store the direction of propagation for this access rule along the way it belongs to) to find out, in which direction does this rule propagate. Another argument is that access rules for roads should be inherited from an enclosing territory, where this rule applies. But it's completely wrong, because there are access rules applied directly to roads, not to a territory, where this road is situated.
Indeed, it could be hard to tag every road behind the barrier with
access=*. But that's another question - question of data completeness. Situation of incomplete tagging is normal for OSM, and it doesn't create any issue. But removal of
access=* tags from roads does, because it increases an incompleteness.
So, that's why we should, ideally, tag roads with limited access tags and avoid relying on barrier node. Especially, if this tagging method is inspired by an attempt to compensate bugs of certain navigation system by changing data for it.
tl;dr follow me on snapchat to see what the #MapLesotho folks get up to. Same as my twitter - dacor_ie
Very shortly I will be heading back to Lesotho for 2 weeks with DebigC and RustyB as part of #MapLesotho which is being supported by Action Ireland Trust and Fingal County Council.
This will be the final trip so during our time there, the activities will be much more focused on the long term sustainability of the project. Some of our main goals will be
- Increase the general level of expertise (think: relations etc)
- Data curation (KeepRight, OMSI etc)
- Data analysis (Overpass, QGIS)
- Train the trainer
- Growing the community
We're also planning a monster Mapillary drive while we're there so I'll be including many photos and videos of Lesotho itself. You can see some from last years trip here
We will also have Oscar from Mapillary coming along to give a masterclass or two on using Mapillary.
If you are in anyway curious about what we're doing, I'm going to be using snapchat a lot while I'm there, in particular, creating ongoing "stories". These will feature snippets of the training, photos, interviews etc (though Im not sure how well the interviews will work given the limitations of snapchat) but it will also feature some of the downtime and general chats among the #MapLesotho folks. I'll be talking to a lot of the local mappers and covering some of our trips to govt agencies as we look to get data released for use in OSM.
If there are questions you'd like to see answered, I'll be taking those also. I have a list of questions myself, but it would be great to hear from others as there will be many things I simply won't think to ask about.
So yeah, follow me if this interest you :)
In the UK they are doing a quarterly project to map more schools and there is a list of schools in Ireland from the Department of Education, but that only has addresses, not locations.
I thought I'd download that file and throw it at Nominatim and see if we can't geocode those addresses, and have something to work with. I thought with all the mapped townlands, that Nominatim might be OK at some of the rural addresses.
The results are not good.
Nominatim returns a bounding box for a result. Here's what happens when you try to geocode all the primary schools:
The big boxes are where nominatim was only able to get the county. You can see that many other boxes are just around towns and villages. Nothing more detailed than that. The map might as well be a map of "Counties and Towns of Ireland", which is useless for locating schools.
An example address is "SCOIL NAOMH MICHEAL,SNEEM,CO KERRY". It's no surprise that Nominatim cannot get any more accurate than the village of Sneem in that case. The other school in Sneem, SCOIL EOIN,TAHILLA,SNEEM,CO. KERRY, is hardly more accurate.
That image is based on the shapefile in primary-schools-areas.zip. If you don't want to generate the data, you can just download it directly from github. By using the Open Data plug-in you can open it in JOSM.
Unfortunately, it looks like the schools list database isn't very useful for mapping all the schools.
Irish addresses, eh?
OSM is a mapping project, but sometimes people write software to do stuff with OSM. Irish Townlands is one example of this. And that code (like much in OSM) is open source (see it here), and I use Github, since it's so popular for open source.
So I set up a Github organization for us! Here: OpenStreetMap Ireland If you're a Github user, feel free to join (on-line, or contact me and I can add you). I've already transferred the townlands.ie source code there. Feel free to transfer any other projects on github there.
Extract all features without a name tag:
Extract all features that has a name tag
Extract all name tags which contains a particular set of words in the name
Extract all name tags which does not contain a particular set of words in the name
Edits by a user
Combine two queries
Extract all features with name tag but without the word
View in the name
name=* && name!~View
All buildings touched by a user in the last one month
user:osmusername && newer:1month && building
user:osmusername && newer:"2016-01-28T19:01:00Z" && building
I copied this into my userdairy to make it easier for people with questions about my use of traffic signs on island on areaised highways to find my reasoning. It was writen in responce to someone stuggling and deleting and modifing them stating as part of the conversation:-
I've corrected two of them, the last one is here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36931147 Please read again http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_sign regarding the use of highway=traffic_sign on a way / node and see this changeset
I think they had some fixed rules based on pre areaised uses that needed to be adapted to make sence of areaised highways https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/area:highway https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/area_highway/mapping_guidelines <--This is a new page I just found and am yet to study (ie not read before below was written...) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Street_area <---This to also has new parts I'm yet to study too (for the same reason)
Comment from Govanus less than a minute ago
this sign was a very large direction sign. Somehow this needs to be a relation and not a phiscial way according to:- http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign which is confusing to do to a real object rather than a virtual sat-nav indicator. there seems a lot of confusion possible till you realise that there are two functions of defining and indicating traffic signs in OSM Function 1: Alert the navigation system that a traffic rule is in action in a place or part of the road. Function 2: To indicate the location of street furniture used to make a physical sign displaying infomation to road users.
In simply mapped areas using a single way for everything then tags fit to way sections for function 1, and a point, with point specific tagging, carries function 2. Its been debated wether the point goes on and into the way (as all is 1-dimensional) or by the side like a more 2-dimensional form. The obvious over sign has hight seperating layering style tags to avoid confusion.
Now in more complex and more detailed mapping used for small area rendering like doorway approches etc meny line features gain full areas and it is logical to make point features of flat objects into lines carring the same tagging to give the same meaning especialy when signs become 10 meters tall and twice the width of the sidewalk like on the southen bypass. there are also box bolard signs used along this road when the flat ones where crashed into that was a cheap replacement. they may apper as tiny squares after being areaised the four faces can carry different signs when needed too (though I don't think the replacement one here dose and carries a non-sign on one side a black rimed white circle).
The function1 role for the traffic_sign UK:610 is given by forceing a split of the routing line at the correct spot to obay it, in an areaised highway. Remeber that the road now has lots of width as well as length and the routing line needs to follow the middle of the carrage way and not run over the sidewalk lamps and poles just drwan in the middle of the road, and this is the natural way to guide cars and busses past the features too (when some one measures the lane width changes and gives it in lane features it will make more sence too that lorries can take a staighter course but the routing line needs to fllow the middle for the logic of so meny other tags that get dumped on it. so that's why I drew them as I did. reading the wiki still dosn't seem to put this into question (especialy if you take the licence to convert points to ways when converting ways to areas when this make most sence when scaled to the phisical feature (ie the same size as real life)
The problem with this direction sign (in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36931147) is that direction signs don't commonly carry a common referance standard-drawing number in the pointed too offical traffic_sign manual because the signs a composed on a custom to site basis following some layout rules on stuff like spaceings and line widths and angles etc. So the function 2 tagging so far seems absent as only the function 1 seems covered so this sign needs to be here to be added to a form of more virtual sign defined here:- http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign possibly as a new role type of physical sign board or something...
The sign contains sub signs too as well a very long winded textual execption list that will probably need a lot of special use of clausual tags (more common to parking) on top of this there is question make about the intergation this with lane tagging and/or diffend marking as although these are ghost lanes only the tagging for laneing carries a lot of this infomation on lane use and possible extions of the inclusion of detination tagging to complement this signs intentions, this is fitting more of the function 1 role. Finally the question of how to intergrate possible lane features that may be drawn in future into any relation for http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign Is another question that will probably be answered as a yes included.
As I had run out of time for this doing the other 100 features needing offset correction I drew a simple sign board so it could at least be used for function 2 pedestrian navigation uses on the sidewalk (like "oh yes I'm here; because overthere's that huge sign shown on my map"). Also others might feel like finishing the puzzel for me as it wasn't finished.
Stefan is 28 years old and just finished his studies in resource and sustainability management (Joint Degree for Sustainable Development). Right now, he is looking for a job. He uses OpenStreetMap not only on a daily base for personal use, but also for his university research in order to visualise the distribution of cultural resources in cities. In future, Stefan would like to learn how to build his own map layers to show otherwise invisible buildings and infrastructures.
How did you discover OpenStreetMap?
The first time I heard about OpenStreetmap was at university. It was also mentioned in an edition of Arte, titled "Le dessous des cartes". But I only really started mapping after participating in a conference on the use of maps for the visualisation of sustainable economy and community initiatives. This initiative, called Transformap, hopes to produce thematic maps based on OpenStreetMap. After this conference, I took part in a monthly meeting of the OpenStreetMappers user group in Graz, Austria - where I was studying at that time. It is a very active group. Unsurprisingly, Graz is very well mapped. That motivated me to participate, so I started to map my own area, Hesbaye.
Do you use OpenStreetMap?
I spend a lot of time looking at maps. There is no other media that helps to understand, discover, or rediscover an area as well as maps. Maps also have the enormous potential to participate in the development of an area. I also have a smartphone with an OpenStreetMap navigation application, called OsmAnd. I use that app for navigation as well as an "ordinary" map of the place that I am visiting.
What kind of mapper are you?
Until now, I mostly did remote mapping in the area where I live: Hesbaye in the Liège province. But slowly, I started to follow some roads and visiting nearby areas to compare the map with the reality. I really like to discover new places thanks to OpenStreetMap. I do not have a real speciality, but by mapping my village, I learned a lot, especially concerning historical buildings. Since I want to show this patrimonium to others, I focus more on this topic at the moment.
What is your biggest achievement as a mapper?
Mapping the village I come from, though that is more like a never-ending marathon than an achievement. When I started, the Hesbaye region was barely mapped. However, nowadays, I notice that there are more and more mappers active in this area. Although I only contributed part of the data, I am very pleased that the map is getting more and more details.
How can we motivate more people to contribute to OpenStreetMap?
By organising Map-Jams and or workshops, e.g. in the Re_lab in Liège. By giving introductions to new mappers and teach them how they can use the different tools (JOSM, GPS, data imports) By organising regular meetings (once or twice a month) for mappers. By making a brochure with information for public services, companies, NGO's, computer scientist, etc. to promote the use of OpenStreetMap.
What is the strength of OpenStreetMap?
OpenStreetMap proved itself a couple of times to help people in need, e.g. after the earthquake in Haïti, or more recently during the ebola outbreak in West-Africa. The humanitarian intervention was more effective because the area was mapped by volunteers. The major asset of OpenStreetMap is without doubt its "open source" character. It is de-facto a common asset that belongs to humanity: everybody can participate -- of course you need an internet connection and a computer. Nevertheless it remains accessible for a large group. Those values are important and provide an alternative paradigm for the mantra of growth and commercial gain. I also believe that OpenStreetMap is a nice example of bottom-up internet organisation.
What is the biggest challenge for OpenStreetMap?
Exactly this internet governance. Unfortunately there are more and more examples of increased top-down control on the internet (for security reasons, economic issues, etc.). As often, there are good arguments for both sides, but I am convinced that open source software proves that the internet is a collaborative project that is for the benefit of all.
Anything else that you want to mention?
OpenStreetMap is really not difficult. It is a community with a lot of passionate people who use patience and enthusiasm to help anyone who wants to get their head around open source software. You can start by exploring the different OpenStreetMap maps and the rest will happen automatically!
O OpenStreetMap é mais que um mapa. É um verdadeiro banco de dados livre do mundo, onde você também pode colaborar. Esse mapa pode tanto representar o mundo de forma plana quanto tridimensional com Simple 3D buildings.
Compartilho os resultados dos meus primeiros passos nesse artigo:
02-02-16 Aggiunto rifugio Fontana Mura, e nominativo parte finale del sentiero Gta418 da Sellery superiore mt1726 a colle Roussa mt2019
02-02-16 Mappato sentiero Gta 412 Colle Roussa - Punta Sarasina e aggiunto rifugio Alpini in alpe Bocciarda
02-02-16 Aggiunto Sentiero M9 punta Sbaron
26-01-2016 Aggiunta sella Colle del Besso mt 1665 e nominato sentiero da col del Besso a prese Damon in sentiero Gta 408
26-01-16 aggiunta sella Colle Muretto e modifica sentiero finale monte Muretto