Even if you do manage to capture a trace with 0.3m precision, and align it with a similarly precise map (!), what next? Other map users will still come by casually, with a zoom level where a precision <5m is indistinguishable, even if in 5 years the majority of their chipsets would give them a <2m precision.

In other words, going from ~5m to <1m accuracy might be useful eventually, but requires cooperation all across the stack, not just at the surveying end - and the returns are diminishing rapidly at this scale. In my opinion, getting a collision (“edit war”) between two micromappers will still take some years.

Nice work - could this take non-English data into account, or does it only work for one language currently?

@Adamant1: there’s loc_name for local names - e.g. this tunnel has an unofficial but widely recognized local nickname, unrelated to the official one: osm.org/way/340126832

On the other hand, although personal mapping does serve a purpose, it’s often a very different purpose than the rest of OSM data: POIs named “I left my car here”, “my appartment” and “change here to go to Piskvor’s place” are transient and not useful beyond the mapper who added them. (As a resident of a tourist destination, I see these all the time.) Perhaps an app that allows for personal, non-shared markers would serve those better (e.g. OsmAnd, Locus); I think that the users who submit those (e.g. in Maps.Me) have no idea they’re adding them to the public database and no intention to do so (as opposed to the other additions, e.g. restaurants).

With better tagging tools, I’m seeing a decline in name=this is an X during the past few years - that at least is a solvable problem, methinks.

This does seem to have an (old-ish) issue open at Github: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1321

Hmmm…

It does say “© OSM contributors / modified by SUI”, but I would not have noticed and would have fallen for it, too :D

(It may not be obvious from the above, but GPS and barometric altitude are not all we’ve got: there are the geosurveys done by traditional methods, and there’s Shuttle Radar Topography Mission data, which is used by many OSM renderers for hillshading)

Hello, that’s an interesting idea - getting an estimate from a few surrounding points. It sounds somewhat simpler than using external data, but what is the expected use? Most things tagged with ele are mountaintops and suchlike - generally things where the point elevation is significantly different from the surroundings.

In the case of elevation, I think that almost-contiguous coverage (most notably SRTM: osm.wiki/SRTM ) is where it becomes useful - e.g. a trip between 800 m ASL and 700 m ASL sounds unproblematic, unless there’s a 1500 m ASL pass inbetween.

As for adding ele=*, check that your readings match those obtained by the traditional surveying methods - both barometric and GPS’s simplified geoid elevations tend to err in tens of meters from the official survey marks around here (but SRTM generally matches to a few m, except for some of its digital artifacts). It might be useful to also add the elevation where officially surveyed, and especially to mark the source of the elevation data.

osm.wiki/LPIS

There are of course glitches, but most of the data is precise and doesn’t clash with existing features…plus it wasn’t imported full-auto, there was a manual verification/correction step before upload.

From what I’ve seen so far, there are many weird Wikipedia/Wikidata links around; this is indeed a great way to flag them for review.

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.

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

Hello, this looks immensely useful! I would like to try this, but I don’t have recent knowledge of any of the available areas. If it’s not too much bother, could you add Prague, Czech Republic? osm.org/relation/439840#map=9/50.0615/14.4662

Looking at my recent changeset discussions, they seem to be of the type “does this way continue somewhere/do you have any more info on this POI/are you sure this is on that side of the road/please don’t name your house My House”. While welcoming new users is surely a nice touch, I don’t see it as the main purpose of changeset discussions.

IMHO the number of total edits by editor doesn’t make much sense here: I would plot the responded% on the Y axis and optionally mark the edit number (if at all).

The other graph would perhaps be useful as well - but note that certain editors start discussions by creating a note (e.g. maps.me, StreetComplete).

Thank you. The chart is a bit complex to grasp (willingness to reply in descending order: JOSM, Potlatch, iD, other editors, maps.me ), but seems to fit my own experience.

Sorry, I’ll try to be more clear: I am not physically near Latvia or Russia; is there a way I can help with the mapping (e.g. tracing roads from satellite pictures), or is the work that’s needed “physically go into the terrain and see”?

Hello,

is this necessary to be done fully on-the-ground, or would tracing from aerial imagery also help?

Congratulations!

Is there a way to map false positives (@gorn: e.g. the turn @ Bertramka is indeed legal, passable and used, despite the sharp angle)

Hier? osm.org/way/39092114#map=17/45.47302/15.54447

@aharvey: Excellent, thank you!

Alas, I’m not looking for the Mapbox background layer, but for the “circles” overlay. That’s not a part of the tiles.