SomeoneElse has commented on the following diary entries
|Should work on OSM cost something in the future||8 days ago||
This post contains a few ad-hominem attacks, unsourced accusations and factual errors such as "Warum sammelt wir nicht auch in OSM Spendengeld" (answer - we do; look at the link at the bottom-right of https://www.openstreetmap.org some time).
You're edits have been (to use a bit of British understatement) "somewhat controversial". Have a look at your changeset comments here and the links into the forum from there.
People in OSM occasionally have arguments about how to do something, but when lots of people are suggesting that you're doing something wrong and you're the only person supporting your point of view then you really do need to take a step back and try and understand other people's point of view. If you can't do that then OSM may not be the project for you - it's inherently a "people project", Your interaction with the community has been unnecessarily confrontational - see for example here.
You clearly have an agenda for the sorts of data that you'd like to be added to OSM. That's OK, everyone does to some extent, and everyone "scratches their own itch". However if what you're trying to do would involve adding lots of low-quality data that is likely to directly cause a problem to lots of other people and it's unsurprising that there have been complaints.
You might want the way that OSM works to change (to move from a "volunteer-surveyor" model to a paid "GIS expert" one). I'm sure that there are people around the world who share some part of that view, and if you want to make it happen you need to win people round to your point of view and lobby the OSMF board (or persuade people to vote for you to join it) . I can guarantee that posts such as the diary entry above will make that less likely, not more likely, to happen.
Andy (a member of OSM's Data Working Group. The DWG got involved because this conflict was referred to us, as these things tend to be).
|Integration of OSM based participatory mapping into LoGIC Project of UNDP Bangladesh||22 days ago||
There have been a number of issues with users trying to upload data as part of this project, mostly now to do with mispelt and partial tags such as "damage_dat". See https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5983656035 for a recent example. Attempts to get in touch with mappers has mostly failed, so I'm adding this comment here.
As I've suggested previously to mappers uploading this data you can see what keys are used for certain things by searching https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/ and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Main_Page . You can also ask questions at https://help.openstreetmap.org/ .
Please do take the time to look for "unusual" keys added by this project and correct them to whatever they should have been in the first place.
Andy Townsend, from OSM's Data Working Group
|Consulate versus Embassy||22 days ago||
Much tagging discussion takes place on the tagging mailing list. Some of the messages there come from people with a deep knowledge of a particular field; some with a lot of familiarity with how OSM tends to tag things. Some there however do seem to overestimate the power of the tagging list (and the wiki) to change the use of tags within OSM - most mappers just use their editor's presets.
Whilst OSM mostly uses British English tags for things, there are a few exceptions, often related to tags that have become established, or would be confusing if a British English term was used ("sidewalk" is an example of that), so it's difficult to say that a tag is "wrong" because it doesn't exactly match the British English usage of a word. An example of the latter is "city" - everywhere in the US that is legally a city there is not tagged as such (see for example Cando in North Dakota). However in cases such as this the wiki should be clear and point out the difference (as the city page does). If pages such as diplomatic=consulate or key:diplomatic contain factual errors about what e.g. consulates do, then please change them, but the "how to use in OSM" part should really reflect usage in OSM, even if that doesn't match British English usage, unless that usage was agreed to be in error (due to an erroneous import, for example). There has been some "targetted editing" and "tag gardening" of embassies I believe, and I seem to remember at least one directed editing task to "add certain tags to embassies" that didn't actually check that the things being edited were embassies.
Andy Townsend (a member of OSM's Data Working Group)
|Further thoughts on Public Rights of Way||29 days ago||
Just for info, this map shows barriers (and PRoW refs) in that area. I can see a gate, stiles and kissing gates there. If there's anything else that you'd expect to see that isn't shown, please let me know!
|Grand Union Canal - Milton Keynes - towpaths||about 2 months ago||
Personally I wouldn't assume that "highway=bridleway" implies universal horse access, only that it's a way designed to be used by horses (among other traffic). You might guess at horse=yes if there's no access tag added, but you can always add an explicit "horse" tag to make it clear. The converse is sometimes true - the footpaths at https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/54.21721/-1.04628 are legally bridleways but you'd struggle to fit dobbin through.
I've seen towpaths that could qualify as any of highway=footway, bridleway, cycleway, track - it really depends on what it looks like locally.
|Searching relations||2 months ago||
I'm not sure why everyone seems to be shooting the messenger here :)
Whilst it's true that that Nominatim can be used to search for relations (in fact most of the time I search for places in OSM I'll be returned a relation) it's also true that relations of the type that the author was looking for here won't be returned by Nominatim (which is fair enough - it's designed as a place search engine, not a hiking trail search).
Also, Overpass' wildcard support seems to have been written by Incy Wincy Spider, and using Nominatim to create Overpass queries for you is definitely far easier than trying to remember Overpass' syntax without crib notes - it's how I always do searches like this.
All in all I'm sure that this diary entry will be useful to lots of people - I'm not sure why there's all the negativity.
|Validation talk at SOTM Milan: Can we validate every change on OSM?||4 months ago||
Whilst it's great that changesets near and not so near are being reviewed, I wouldn't equate "Flagged for Review by Mapbox" with "vandalism", which your graphic above suggests. Even if they're problematical, most "flagged as vandalism" edits aren't (for example of the last 6 "vandalism" issues reported to the DWG via the "report" function at an absolute stretch only 3 could be considered "vandalism" - more common reasons are new users trying to get the hang of things, and disagreements over tagging.
|My quest to map the fairgrounds.||4 months ago||
Yes - "showground" is British English for what Americans would call "Fairgrounds". Local ones often less permanent - the nearest one to me is just a field with fancy gates 363 days of the year.
|India is not Bharat||4 months ago||
The name of India was recently changed from English to Hindi and back - see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=706785#p706785 and the rest of that thread for details. It's possible that you're seeing a tile with the "old" name in it from a cache somewhere (such as your browser cache).
|Why does OSM default render highway=path as a cycleway?||4 months ago||
The isn't really the fault of OSM Carto - "path" in OSM is a pretty nasty concept. It's really just "a way of getting from A to B that isn't wide enough for 4 wheeled transport". However we are where we are, and its certainly not going away.
"bicycle=designated and foot=designated" just means that two forms of transport are suggested to use that route as opposed to others; it doesn't tell you anything about what sort of "highway" it is. Personally I'd always try and use a more appropriate highway tag if there is one (does it look like it's designed for use by bicycles? highway=cycleway, with appropriate access tags. Horses? highway=bridleway, again with appropriate access tags.
You can also use other tags (surface, width, tracktype, smoothness etc.) to try and get the sense across properly.
|Share your story: Open Gender Monologues||4 months ago||
@b-jazz That comment in that SOTM-US video is clearly meant as and taken as a joke (clue: the audience laughs). I've no idea what you said to the SotM-US organisers or what they said to you, but perhaps you need to be a little more open to what other people think - sometimes things are a little more complicated than you might at first think.
|Is it usually difficult to come to a local concensus on tagging?||5 months ago||
The short answer is "yes". It can be particularly tricky when there are relatively few mappers in an area, and so less chance to see other people's views on how best to tag certain sorts of objects. Generally speaking the way to resolve these sorts of issues is to talk about them, but there has to be an amount of give and take - sometimes in OSM discussions there (and I'm thinking of this tagging list thread in particular here) there isn't.
There currently seems to be a bit of a discussion going on in the forum thread at the moment, but there aren't that many people there (and especially not many Canadians). The Canadian country forum is also very quiet. There's a bit more at the talk-ca mailing list; maybe try there?
On the tagging itself, the only other thing that I'd add would be to try and capture as much other information as possible to give renderers a chance of making a decent job of the road regardless of classification (surface, width, that sort of thing).
|Here is a Free Republic of Liberland||6 months ago||
But does it have a beer and an airline?
|Will the DWG block us all one day?||6 months ago||
First things first, obviously Betteridge's law of headlines applies here. :)
To be clear about one thing - the user blocks list is not a "list of shame". As described on the DWG's wiki page, blocks 'don't imply that users have done anything wrong, and often contain friendly language to try and communicate that fact. Usually before any block is applied (even a "0-hour message that has to be read") attempts will be made to contact the mapper, such as via changeset discussion comments'.
It's also meaningless to try and equate blocks (or OSM accounts) with actual human users. Where one user (or a group of users) has created multiple accounts to try and "make a particular edit" in spite of their being problems with it (real examples: change all the tracks in an area to roads so that their preferred Garmin map shows them; changing their school's name to something like "please don't give us any homework") then the number of blocks per user or even per OSM object might be very high; they don't mean that more OSM users are proportionately being blocked.
As Mikel is I think trying to suggest, it would be possible to obtain details of the actual incident from the block(s) associated with it (and "incident" will most often be "hello and welcome to OSM, some people are trying to help you"). Excluding data from deleted users, OSM changeset, object and block data is public, so any OSM user can do that (I'm assuming here that OSM's eventual GDPR implementation will somewhat resemble what Geofabrik and HDYC have already done).
Best Regards Andy (from the DWG, but writing in a personal capacity)
|Welcome to OpenStreetMap!||7 months ago||
In a diary that's shared between people of many different cultures and languages, I wouldn't assume that anything was obvious, actually.
|Required URL / graves / was not found on this server.||7 months ago||
http://osmtools.org/ just looks to be domain parked right now. I'd suggest contacting whoever you think created it.
|CartoCSS IRC channel?||7 months ago||
@Marcos Dione That sounds plausible, yes. Although it's a proprietary channel there's an "open sign-up" page somewhere, though obviously you'd want to archive anything you want to keep as obviously they can take it away at any stage in the future.
|CartoCSS IRC channel?||7 months ago||
I'd imagine that most OSM CartoCSS people who use IRC will either be in #osm or #osm-dev, so I'm not convinced that a new IRC channel would get that many people in it. No harm in trying to create a new channel of course and see who turns up.
Another possibility might be https://gis.stackexchange.com/ (but you'd need a well-defined question there not just "help!") or maybe the US-based Slack might have some US-based CartoCSS people in it.
|Switch2osm "Manually building a tile server" page updated||8 months ago||
It rather depends on what you're trying to do, I think. If you're already familiar with Docker etc. and "just want to render some tiles", then quite possibly. If you're not, or you want to set up a server to serve custom tiles in an app, or you want to understand more about how everything hangs together, then probably not. The idea behind these guides is that you can follow them with essentially no existing knowledge. The carto docker guide just throws you at this page and expects you to figure out for yourself what you need.
The "obvious bit missing" to me is an equivalent guide for some sort of vector mapping. OpenMapTiles is a whole lot nearer to that than it used to be, but it's not quite a solution to the same problem.
|captcha||8 months ago|