Retiring from OSM

Posted by LACDH on 1 December 2018 in English (English).

I have decided to stop helping out with OSM, especially in areas in New Zealand. Seems that all my edits got changed back. And editing to the guidelines and have your edits reverted…

Location: Orewa, Hibiscus Coast, Hibiscus and Bays, Auckland, 0931, New Zealand

Comment from -karlos- on 1 December 2018 at 16:51

Could you add some changesets?

Comment from LACDH on 1 December 2018 at 16:53


What do you mean?

Comment from -karlos- on 1 December 2018 at 16:56

All your edits got changeset nurmber. Please add some of the reverted changesets to your block post. So we may see what and why they have been reverted.

Comment from LACDH on 1 December 2018 at 16:59


Comment from alexkemp on 1 December 2018 at 17:22

Changeset 60090584

I’m obviously ignorant, but I cannot see from that url why (nor even if) it has been reverted.

Comment from LACDH on 1 December 2018 at 17:38

Most of the roads were merged and everything was cleaned up. Them someone has come along and added them all back, not just that area as well.

Comment from Heather Leson on 1 December 2018 at 18:29

Thanks for your contributions to OSM.

Comment from Richard on 1 December 2018 at 19:51

LACDH, I think people are having trouble understanding what you’re saying here. Could you give a concrete example? (e.g. “I added Frog Street in Toadville and now it’s been deleted”) What do you mean by “merged” and “cleaned up”?

Comment from Warin61 on 1 December 2018 at 23:21

Just as you have edited existing entries in OSM, so people may have edited your entries?

Changeset 60090584 deleted;

some relations .. they look to be turn restrictions.

some ways

some nodes

The people who put those in .. should they take offense and cease contributing to OSM?

What I am getting at .. are any of these changes made to ‘your’ entries destructive to the map?

Note: the ‘your’. Once you have entered data it is no longer ‘yours’ but the communities. Certainly some monitoring is a good thing both to gauge others perception as to the accuracy of the changes and any updates that may occur.

Unless the changeset was reverted then I would think the changes you have noted are simply others doing the same as yourself - trying to improve the map.

Comment from escada on 3 December 2018 at 12:21

So with “merge” you probably mean that you replaced e.g. the “twin” road way “Hibiscus Coast Highway” with 1 OSM way ? Which was then mapped again as twin road in (Twin ways, added slip roads primary links and added directionality one way.) ?

On aerial imagery I see that at least part of that road is separated by a physical obstacle (grass, ..). I’m not familiar with the location, so it’s hard to tell whether the intermediate sections with just white markings should be mapped as 1 OSM or not. What’s the ratio of the length with a physical separation vs. lane markings ?

Comment from Warin61 on 3 December 2018 at 22:37

There are those who think a simpler map is ‘better’ - less confusing, less clutter, easier to understand. There are those who think more detail is ‘better’ - reflects ground truth, aids detailed navigation.

I have come across those those who reduced the information … make it ‘simpler’. I am in the other camp - more detail to reflect what is there.

A vector map can have lots of detail, and not show it when zoomed out - thus making the map ‘simpler’ yet retaining the detail when zoomed in. If the data is not there then when zoomed in that data is missing. So that is how I justify my preference for that data detail.

Login to leave a comment