Thanks for the update – looks great!

Yes, thank you very much for this – it connects a bunch of stuff I’d half-known before!

This looks delightful, I plan to install it soon. Thank you for writing it.

Thank you for this great tool – it’s inspired me to get back into (finally) updating Boston, MA, USA area bus routes to PTv2 (they are pretty much all present, but using V1 which makes them incompatible with all the cool newer tools). I’m tracking my progress on osm.wiki/MBTA – glad for help if anyone is so moved!

That’s just a quirk of the wiki – spaces and underscores are equivalent (which is one of the reasons it’s best not to use spaces in keys or (coded) values). It’s fine to document cultural_district at osm.wiki/Key:cultural_district . Thanks for asking!

If you feel like it, adding osm.wiki/Template:KeyDescription to the pages would be very helpful, too!

Wow, that’s a lot of work. Nicely done.

If you are inclined, making wiki pages for all the tags you added, and just copying the descriptions you’ve already written for them here over to those pages would be a very reasonable and nice thing to do. If you don’t want to do it, just ask and I’ll likely get to it eventually.

This is very neat – good work!

But your general idea of considering if there are bad or merely less-optimal suggestions being made is very worthwhile. Please do bring up other ones!

Glad to help, jimkats!

The changes you made two or three days ago should now be visible, although they may not be visible at all zoom levels, as different zoom levels get re-rendered at different times.

If you are referring to this edit: osm.org/changeset/88481285 – it looks to me like it has updated now. Does it still look out of date to you?

I just wrote up this suggested process for dealing with large coastline changes, here. Glad for comments.

1. All changes over ~750 sq km within a day should be presumed incorrect. (This is already the case, as various people have said elsewhere)
2. If such a change persists for more than one day (i.e. two failed updates in a row), an bunch of automated alerts should be sent, to everywhere from the mailing lists, to IRC, to wherever else we can think of, encouraging people to revert the changes.
3. If a mapper believes such a large change to be valid (as in the Rio de la Plata case), the proper process (enforced by prompt reverts and blocking if necessary) is to create a wiki page (probably using the formal proposal process, or something similar), demonstrate consensus for the change (over at least a month, if not longer), get joto’s explicit acknowledgement that he recognizes that consensus, and only then apply the change (which joto will promptly manually release).

imagico – thank you so much for your comments and links; they are very helpful!

As of now, at least, the Plata issue is not contributing to the lack of updates, as it is not varying from the Jan 9, 2020 version. I agree that consensus still needs to be reached, but it is now (once again) separate from the lack-of-updates problem.

As of the July 23rd data file, the lack of updates is because, over six months, 36,491.37 sq km of changes have piled up, in tiny drips all across the world. These are not “someone is either scratching a personal or collective political itch or an actual mapping error”, these are “normal edits” that have merely piled up enough to hit the cutoff.

I’ve manually identified about 24,000 sq km of them, and will document them on the wiki so others can confirm they are valid (or revert them if they are in fact “political itches” or “actual mapping errors”).

I would be DELIGHTED to have support in doing that.

Yes, and I opened a more recent one, here: https://github.com/fossgis/osmdata/issues/12

I also requested that the osm.org operations team fix the problem themselves, but they said they wanted it fixed upstream: https://github.com/openstreetmap/chef/pull/326