“[OSM-talk] Automatically generated changeset discussion comments by OSMCha” was started at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-January/thread.html

But what kind of questions would you like to see answered?

Recently I was looking for tool that would list unsolved notes made by StreetComplete, with plan of commenting where somebody may be advised how to use SC.

Maybe also spot some usability issues that happen regularly with different people.

to me that sounds a strange after first saying “Don’t use it to put your personal notes.” I’m a bit confused by the wording of that bullet point.

I attempted to improve it in osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Notes&diff=1542581&oldid=1518706

I think that intended meaning of “personal note” is “note that only original author is able to use” not “note that original author intends to solve”.

I frequently add notes using Vespucci/StreetComplete that are much easier to solve using JOSM.

If you don’t trust the contributor, and they don’t answer, you have to go check

wait, there are people that delete POIs based solely on notes, without verification?

Some improvement suggestions: osm.org/way/30530331#map=19/50.08304/14.41988&layers=N has a contact:website= , so no need to suggest website= if matches.

Fixed, in next update websites will not be suggested for objects with contact:website tag.

Thanks!

The “wikidata for event” warning should perhaps be less authoritatively worded - or do you mean “if it is a battle memorial, it should have its own wikidata item linking to the main item”? E.g. this: osm.org/node/310477881

Note that for example memorial depicting famous event may end with only secondary link. Monuments, memorials, statues etc should have wikipedia tag only in situation where monument, memorial, statue itself is so famous that it has its own Wikipedia article.

examples from my city:

osm.org/way/374515883#map=19/50.06154/19.93818 - has both wikipedia and subject:wikipedia - as there are wikipedia pages about statue itself and about depicted person

osm.org/node/5157607312#map=19/50.08024/19.88841 - has only subject:wikipedia, as depicted person is famous but statue itself has no wikipedia article

Back to osm.org/node/310477881

given that monument about battle is mapped, not the battle I think that wikipedia/wikidata tag is wrong and subject:wikidata, subject:wikipedia should be used instead

@nyuriks

At this moment I am focusing on using already available data and fixing problems that are detected in OSM. But later, after cleaning up Poland…

@DevonshireBoy42 @Xadees

I hope that reports that I generated will be useful :)

@Polyglot

Unfortunately osm.wiki/SPARQL_examples#Quality_Control and my tool are developed completely separately.

But it should be possible to make SPARQL queries that detect similar problems.

“Inner with same tags Could be auto cleaned” - I would dispute this. I encountered cases where tags from inner way should be removed and cases where entire inner way should be removed.

“I signed-up hoping I can get data for the Philippines. Only to find out that nothing not even a country name node exist! :( “

Ouch. In my case my surprise was “wait, nobody thought about properly mapping amenity=bicycle_parking in my city”?

It seems a really poor graph type

• it should not be stacked graph

• each region should have its own bar, this graph type works for logical progression (number of tags over time etc)

@TheSwavu - it works as tl;dr but it is more complex. In many cases object should be deleted rather than retagged. In some cases (like highways under construction with highway=construction) there are well defined tag values rather than lifecycle prefixes.

In English language, “woodchip” is a mass noun” - can you give source for this? “woodchips” seems to be OK or better - for example Wikipedia has https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodchips (and my printed Polish-English dictionaries lack both versions of this word)

As mentioned in osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny/surface%3Dwoodchip_to_surface%3Dwoodchips&diff=1212965&oldid=1212963&rcid=&curid=148725 - Collins also has woodchips ( http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/woodchips ).

@Your Village Maps - see https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1800 (something went wrong and it will be fixed)

@Stereo - see https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1799

Personally, I’d expect to see the M6, M1, M18 and M60 much clearer than the other roads at that zoom, as is possible now. This isn’t a problem from z9 on (the “motorway” red there stands out much better, as seen in your examples above).

See https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-134322828

I fixed final sections, images should now appear properly.

This could be solved by starting with a less dark casing colour on z11-12

I modified casings on z11, z12.

At z12 this causes some “artefacts” like in your rendering of Market Weighton.

What kind of artefact appears on z12?

In this images there are artefacts on z11 - but it was a bug that I just fixed (unwanted line in primary tunnels is now also gone but it may appear on some pictures presented here).

OK, #811 is fixable also by other means - but making roads narrower reduces impact.

overhanging lettering

I am not considering this as something ugly, unlike too wide streets.

For example in

I am considering left as ugly - result of too wide streets.

Wide streets also may make map misleading - see https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/811 and https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/286 that are fixable only by making roads narrower.