nesnažit se to eskalovat do nějakého soupeření s jinými komerčními mapami. Na to ani nemáme prostor. … Pro mne je důležité mapování míst kde žiji, kde to znám osobně.

A o tom to je, mapovat místa svého okolí, může to být i docela pěkně velká distance, pokud v širokém okolí není moc mapperů. Konkurovat komerčním mapám se potom dá docela dobře, já například udržuju poměrně hodně informací na lepší úrovni oproti Mapy.cz, jelikož mám místní znalost. Například se přesunul finanční úřad na jinou adresu, otevřel se obchod, jiný obchod zanikl, a uběhne v klidu půl roku i rok a na Mapy.cz všechny tyto změny vůbec ještě nejsou, na OSM díky mé editaci jsou údaje aktuální.

Je pouze jedna věc, na kterou nemám kapacitu: turistické stezky, ty jsou prostě na Mapy.cz nejvíc aktuální a pro mě je to něco, na co nemám čas ani náladu to udržovat.

Btw: I saw one more similar issue in the Czech gardens: tagging the private sheds as amenity=shelter. It makes a mess on the hiking maps then, because many of them show them as an infrastructure for the tourist.

That’s also interesting. Sometimes it’s really better not to add an object at all if people don’t check all its necessary properties or tags. I made such a mistake when adding a parcel box for the first time, I should have checked other parcel boxes first, but luckily it was not a serious issue, it was just missing one important tag to be recognizable by search engine.

I read an article where such pool data (not from osm) were used by an marketing agency to offer grocery delivery service.

Sorry, but this is not a reason to do any mapping, to support unwanted commercial advertisement of any kind. I’m sure if a marketing agency wanted to make use of such data, they would certainly check aerial imagery, not an unreliable map like OSM.

BTW I do map permanent pools, you can very easily see from aerial view if such a pool is on earth level because they don’t throw a shadow and often they have a border around to walk on. We have very high quality aerial maps here in CZ.

If anyone wants to map moveable pools in private gardens, then he/she should also map trees in gardens since they are far more permanent. Whenever I map something I ask myself a question: does it serve the public or not, might it be of interest to the public or not. We could also talk about mapping of sandboxes (for children) or flower beds in private gardens.

Sheds are perfectly okay to map and i would consider removing them as vandalism.

I agree. I don’t remove existing sheds unless I see that it disappeared from newest aerial maps. I will rewrite my original post to be more clear on this.

This is why i strategically take Mapillary Fotos of the Areas i am mapping.

Good idea (unless history of aerial maps is archived and publicly accessible).

Pěkně sepsáno. Chybí mi tam jen zmínka, že čím dál více firem v ČR i zahraničí používá OSM pro své firemní účely na webu. U nás bych jmenoval např. Českou poštu, která ukazuje na webu každou pobočku přímo z OSM. V Německu firmy přestávají používat embeddované Google mapy kvůli nějakým licenčním omezením od Googlu.

And yes, I fixed some of them with access=private, but I am strongly against adding more of those round small pools in private gardens, it doesn’t make any sense. We don’t add garden furniture either :-D

Let me explain the background why I wrote my post. There’s been a highly active mapper who apparently added small private swimming pools just for fun to the area which I take care of. It’s been just chaotic, where he mapped like 5% but left out the most. None of them were marked with access=private. And now a few years later it’s clear that it is utter nonsense to map such pools, a high number of those pools is gone (according to aerial maps), which doesn’t surprise me. It’s just more work for me as a mapper to fix it. It’s simply nonsense. BTW mosquitos cannot breed there because of chlorine.