Hi Julien.

Today I came across this boundary you mapped or adjusted and I have a couple of questions. In the Wiki, it states that there is no admin level 6 in Thailand. This boundary between Mae Taeng and Chiang Dao, both being districts (amphoes), would seem to fit into the admin_level 6 category. In addition, I have zero experience with naming or assigning boundary tags so I'm unsure about how to name this one, or even if I should.

I've been using the Thai Topo map in JOSM to adjust boundaries in my area of Saraphi and it seems to be fairly accurate. You quoted WorldTopoMap as your source here but JOSM doesn't offer that imagery. Is it still available in the iD editor?

The Saraphi boundary I mentioned always defines two sub-districts. Saraphi itself of course and the various bordering subdistricts. The name of that one is Saraphi in OSM. But perhaps naming such a boundary would be incorrect

Moreover, the Wiki definitions are always suspect because so many contributors and editors are clueless or don't know how to write, or both, but it seems clear that admin_level 5 is not in use in Thailand.

What are your feelings about adding a name and/or changing the admin_level of this boundary?

Dave

Actually, it was the Mae Taeng River I aligned

Hello,

Where did you get the name "Chamadevi Road" for route 1015 in Lamphun?

I cannot verify that as the name and
I'm doing a lot of mapping in that area and would like to use your sources if they are valid.

Sorry if this translation is bad:

สวัสดีครับ
ถนนชามเดवी (Thanon Chamadevi) สำหรับเส้นทาง 1015 ในลำพูน คุณได้ชื่อนี้มาจากไหนครับ
ผมยืนยันชื่อนี้ไม่ได้ ผมกำลังทำแผนที่อยู่ในพื้นที่นั้นอยู่ครับ ถ้าแหล่งข้อมูลของคุณเชื่อถือได้ ผมอยากจะใช้ข้อมูลของคุณด้วยครับ

I appreciate your feedback, silversurfer. I must say, I felt a bit as though I was being scolded for my oversight.

The thing with the saved session shocked me because I had just told the commenters that I would be more careful next time and then, I accidentally did it again.

I use like 6 different imagery layers when I'm mapping in Alaska and the idea of a saved session that reloads all those layers the next day seemed like an excellent idea. But there are drawbacks, as I learned.

Thanks again.

In further response to the concerns about the size of my changesets. I carefully used new layers when moving to another area of interest today (2024-02-13) yet the bounding box of my changeset remained overly large, extending from Alaska to Sloan NY.

I just now discovered the reason for this, I had saved my session to enable a quick return to my earlier editing area in Alaska. However, unbeknownst to me, that huge bounding box came along with the restored session. So when I opened a new layer in NY, that data became part of my Alaska-based changeset.

I had never used the Save Session feature before and hadn't known about this aspect.

I have received some messages about the size of my changesets. I carefully used new layers when moving to another area of interest today yet the bounding box of my changeset remained overly large, extending from Alaska to Sloan NY.

I just discovered the reason for this, I had saved my session to enable a quick return to my earlier editing area in Alaska. However, unbeknownst to me, that huge bounding box came along with the restored session.

I had never used the Save Session feature before and hadn't known about this aspect.

I have nade something like 16,000 edits in the 12 years since I started mapping with OSM and this is the first time I've ever gotten comments about the SIZE of a changeset.

I had no idea people would be so concerned about such things, or that people actually monitor changeset characteristics.

I promise I'll never do that again! LOL

I am in Thailand during the winter but I've been doing a lot of mapping in Alaska. I went away for the afternoon, made some mappable observations locally and merely forgot that the changeset was still open in Alaska when I added the new data to OSM.

Yes, I did that earlier today. I simply forgot to close the one I'd been working on in Alaska before adding my Thailand updates.

Sorry for the typos in my earlier comment. I'm not Thai and I mixed up parts of those names, LOL. When I typed Ban Pha Tong, it should have been Ban Tha Pong, Wat Tha Pong and Wat Tha Pong School.

Well, the center of the town might be a little further north but, yes, it is the correct name according to the Thai Topos I have. Also, there are some sois there that I recorded yesterday that have the names Ban Tha Pong Soi 3 and Ban Tha PongSoi 10. In addition, Wat Pha Tong and Wat Pha Tong School are just SE of where I placed the node.

After reviewing the position of the existing node for Ban Den, I moved both nodes further north to more closely agree with JOSM's Thai Topo overlay map.

One other thing: The Thai Topo overlay map omits the word "Ban" from the names of both villages but other maps I have and the Soi names I observed persuaded me to use the full names "Ban Den" and "Ban Pha Tong".

Does this answer your question?

I was surprised and, to be brutally honest, a little bit dismayed to see this import in Alaska. It's good to have a source of data to fill in empty regions in the vast area occupied by Alaska but the NHD rendering of rivers drives me crazy. Thousands of little segments, most unnamed, some comprised of two nodes connecting two other short segments. It's simply horrible. I have done a ton of correcting of these blasted imports over the years but life is short and lately I haven't the patience to do what needs to be done. Plus, some of the water features I added a few years ago were overwritten by the NHD data.

Sorry to be so negative. I appreciate the amount of work you did to make this import happen but sometimes I wonder if NHD imports are worth the amount of effort they require to make them accurate.

Okay, thank you.

It seems obvious to me that there is not a ditch to carry a large stream in a remote region in Alaska so I'll assume it is simply an error.

I will fix it. Thanks for your rapid reply.

Hello,

Did you change the Chilkat River from a water=river to a waterway=ditch? (By the way the river is incorrectly named — it's actually Jarvis Creek.) But I cannot imagine that the waterway you tagged is actually a "ditch".

Can you clarify your reason for tagging it that way?

Correct. None of those tags were added by me. Unfortunately, the tag history doesn't go back far enough to indicate the original mapper.

There might be a way to determine the originator but if there is, I am not aware of it.

Hi again Mateusz,
I checked all my OSM messages going back to 2012 and did not find anything about those tags or the mapper's identity.

I might have contacted him via a changeset comment but it was so long ago that I gave up searching.

IMO, you should go ahead remove those weird tags when you see them.

It is indeed a legacy tag but was placed there by a Thailand-based mapper to help him compile Garmin-compat maps with the mkgmap program.

It's long past time to remove them.
I also inquired about them and he asked me to please leave them in place, and I did.

This was not my tagging. There is, or was, a Thailand-based mapper who created these tags years ago. I also inquired about them and he (I can't recall his name) asked that I leave them in place. IIRC, they were to help him render some object(s) using the mkgmap program.

Feel free to remove them.

I believe that particular road is a borderline case. It might allow two cars to pass if they drive slowly and cautiously, but if a car and a small truck were to attempt that, one would have to come to a complete stop. In this case, your suggested tagging seems fine. Easier perhaps and less controversial would be to simply eliminate the lanes tag entirely and toss in an estimated width. Easier still: tag it with lanes=1 and let it go at that. The latter was my choice in this case because I wasn't aware of the more modern tagging scenario.

Thailand is very different from most other places because it has a large percentage of narrow streets that defy the usual logic for determining lanes. This makes for difficult tagging decisions on OSM. Check out this photo I used for my blog a number of years ago:
How would you tag this one?
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/7a6noujdbe3rf19f7210q/Two-lane-road-Thai-style-IMG_2459.jpg?rlkey=daat2m5nxj5uisyumfoktwtzd&dl=0
I'm not doing nearly as much mapping as I did a few years back and I don't subscribe to any mailing lists, so thanks for the update and the information. I will add those tags to my presets and use them when appropriate.

I typically change the lanes tagging only if I've seen the roads myself. Thailand has very narrow sois and in this neighborhood, that's the case. If two cars must slow down before meeting on a road, I tag that road as lanes=1 even if there is a dividing line (as is often the case).

It's almost laughable that some of the sois in my neighborhood (and that one) have a lanes=2 tag because they are definitely not two-lane highways.

Happy New Year!