OpenStreetMap

Angry OSM editors?

Posted by Beachmiles on 17 January 2020 in English (English).

This note has some strong anger, seems a tad excessive https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1995084

Comment from lyx on 17 January 2020 at 07:47

If I’m not misinterpreting who made that comment, it was not an OSM editor as the person re-opening the note has never made an edit. So, just an ordinary troll.

Comment from tyr_asd on 17 January 2020 at 10:15

@lyx: It was actually the rather senior mapper who made this inappropriate reply: “Baloo Uriza” (formerly known as “Paul Johnson”). This cannot be seen very well on the OSM user interface, but via the XML returned by the notes API it is clear: https://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/notes/1995084

Comment from mmd on 17 January 2020 at 10:40

Needless to say that this rather senior mapper is also an administrator of the OpenStreetMapOrg Telegram group. I hope that’s not the new way of leading by example.

Comment from Heather Leson on 17 January 2020 at 10:46

Thanks for sharing. I really hope that we can treat each other better in OSM.

Perhaps we can encourage rephrasing feedback:

“thanks for your post. It would be better to edit with X and Y. “

How do you think people should give feedback?

Heather

Comment from SomeoneElse on 17 January 2020 at 11:44

Hello Beachmiles,

Andy from OSM’s Data Working Group here. I’ve hidden the note with the offensive comment on there, since comments like that have no place within OSM. I’ll separately message the person who made it explaining why that comment was not appropriate.

With regard to the problem that caused you to add the note in the first place, it does look as if the turn lane information is now in OSM (actually added by the person who made the offensive comment) - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/755568005 - but that doesn’t contain information about the destination of each HOV lane.

I’ve re-added the note contents at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2060067 , but I suspect that it’s really a more general question (“how should we tag the destinations of individual lanes”). The answer to that is that there seems to be some usage of “destination:lanes” - see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/destination:lanes#overview for the number in use around the world and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/375327794 for an example on the I5 South not far from you. What I don’t know is whether a Tesla will actually use that information (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination#destination:lanes.3D.2A_tagging asks that question more generally). You’d have to ask Tesla that question.

Generally speaking, if you see problems with offensive comments you can either email OSM’s Data Working Group directly on data@osmfoundation.org . In most cases you can report the item on which they appear, but in this case it’s your own note, so you may not be able to do that.

You can ask future “how to tag…” questions at https://help.openstreetmap.org/ , and if you want to talk to people in the OSM US community, you can use the link to request to join “OSM US” from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_centric_Slack_workspaces . I know that Tesla’s use of OSM data occasionally gets mentioned there.

Best Regards,

Andy

Comment from Baloo Uriza on 17 January 2020 at 16:37

I’ve re-added the note contents at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2060067 , but I suspect that it’s really a more general question (“how should we tag the destinations of individual lanes”). The answer to that is that there seems to be some usage of “destination:lanes” - see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/destination:lanes#overview for the number in use around the world and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/375327794 for an example on the I5 South not far from you. What I don’t know is whether a Tesla will actually use that information (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination#destination:lanes.3D.2A_tagging asks that question more generally). You’d have to ask Tesla that question.

I do apologize for my rather aggressive tone in the note, I’ve been under a considerable amount of stress and it’s been affecting, probably most pronounced, my performance with OpenStreetMap of late.

I’m not convinced Tesla is actually smart, given the number of times I’ve seen ‘em drive headlong into trees, concrete barriers and pedestrians with the driver overtrusting the driver assistance in my city. Plus the hype surrounding electric vehicles and driver assistance technology overselling the benefits is creating a parasitic drag in many cities on adopting actually city-scalable infrastructure and highway safety in the urban context. I’d probably take a lot less dour view of the company and it’s products if they were honest about their product: “Look, it’s basically an GM EV1 with Cadillac’s supercruise and a higher price tag, and it’s never going to be as good as a sober and alert human driver except under ideal rural highway conditions.” They’ve chosen the opposite tack, thus Tesla considered harmful.

But more to the subject of the map itself, the way I’ve seen most data consumers actually work is to ignore destination:lanes and infer the destination from the destination= tags on the ramps, essentially using the turn:lanes=* tags to imply destination:lanes=* based off the destination. I think mkgmap does this, Magic Earth does this, Osmand does this. This is probably the better way forward from a human prospective, destination=, junction:ref=, destination:street=* destination:ref=, and the destination::to=* tags are all trivially straightforward. JOSM has a good turn lanes editor. Slap :forward or :backward to thee end if need be for two-way traffic flows. You could have some seriously Cities Skylines level absurdity with toll plazas in multilane cloverleaf lane drop split interchanges before you run into the risk of overrunning the size limit on values.

destination:lanes=* not so much. destination:lanes=* very rapidly runs into the problem of overflow. The 255 character value limit means destination:lanes=* can easily overrun the length limit where lanes have multiple destinations and there’s three or four lanes, with most of the information being redundant and long. It’s also way less effort to just remove destination:lanes=* when doing lane tagging than to update the values, even with an advanced editor.

I really wish id drew lanes and had an easy lane editor like JOSM does, however, as the lack of this functionality does tend to cause lane tagging to break with subtlety and silently without obvious feedback that this has happened

Comment from philippec on 18 January 2020 at 08:22

If the note was “Going north on 405 in an hov lane a tesla tries to get in far left hov lane which goes to the 605. It need to stay in the right of the two hov lanes to continue on the 405”,

is there a problem ?

Comment from Heather Leson on 18 January 2020 at 18:25

@Baloo Uriza - thanks for your honesty. We are all human. The key is that we want this project to exist and thrive. I hope that you can take care. Stress and burnout are such a big part of open projects. All we can do is be allies with each other.

Heather


Login to leave a comment