Hi, how do you asses out of the aerial imagery if the pool is permanent or moveable?

If you are only mapping from the Aerial you better not delete anything you are not 100% certain.

This is why i strategically take Mapillary Fotos of the Areas i am mapping. In 10 years i took photos of 6300km of Streetview like imagery with ~1 Mio images.

So whenever there is something uncertain i can go back to imagery.

I now started going back to areas i was in 2014/2015 and update imagery with 360° imagery.

The point is not “build permission” but movable/non permanent structures like small plastik pools.

Sheds are perfectly okay to map and i would consider removing them as vandalism. Removing perfectly valid objects which do exist by fact have a valid point beeing in OSM.

I’d like to bring a new perspective into the game as notes are a matter of Communication and to bring it even further:

"A note is a temporary mailinglist for a certain location on the map"

It may not only be used to “report a failure” or “missing” object, it may also enable multi mappers to share knowledge of an ongoing change on the map.

I tend to use these for building a community of surrounding mappers for long running constructions. Relocating a highway may take years with 100s of small little steps in changing of intersections etc. So you want to get all interested parties to the same state.

I’d like to have new features for Notes:

• subscribe
• unsubscribe
• remind me in X
• reopen in X

Currently you can only subscribe by writing something to the note. For the reminder and reopen i wrote myself a little bot.

Flo

Wonderful - I love OSMCha but it seemed to deviate into non existance with Mapbox - So good it has a new home …

I am still setting up TM2 whenever i need one because its documentation, requirements and simplicity is great. You can set it up by strictly following the Readme within 5 minutes and off you mapping goes.

I am sysadmin by profession and i failed to even understand or setup a TM3. So i think of fixing some TM2 annoyances instead of looking at TM progress.

@Warin61 - The tagging as service/driveway already says its not a public road. Thats enough. Any access restriction which is not explicitly verifyable by a sign, gate, fence or something is broken.

We do not map/tag anything which is not verifyable with the great exception of boundaries.

And show me one driveway which has more agricultural when people are living there. I am myself living in the middle of the woods with a rough road of 2km as the only access.

As soon as people are living there you have 2 car usages per day for people going to/from work. Show me a track where there are more than 400 tractor movements a year.

And we are not talking about delivery by plane but places where Amazon Logistic goes with the delivery vehicles.

Flo

BTW - Slapping an access=private to all driveways makes them unroutable. Its a bad habbit IMHO to tag access restrictions where they are not explicitly signed.

I call that “felt access restriction”. As OSM maps things which are verifyable on the ground we should NOT tag every driveway with access=private.

I am doing analysis on “non-routeable” addresses for example Nordrhein-Westfalen a part of Germany and we have TONS of addresses which are more than 500 to 1000m from the next legal street to use although they have a driveway which is legally not usable by the access=private

Flo

A track is defined as beeing mostly agricultural. A driveway to a farm is not for agricultural purpose but for living so the tagging as track is broken. There are more Post, Amazon Logistics, parcel deliverys, garbage trucks, School kid transportation etc than there are tractor movements.

So tracks which represent the only way to housing or the primary access to housing should be retagged as service/driveway. If not asphalt probably with different surface tags.

Flo

Zum thema living_street führe ich seit vielen Jahren erbitterte Diskussionen. Jeder Numerische Wert lässt sich in Deutschland nicht mit dem Recht vereinbaren.Die Geschwindigkeit ist “schrittgeschwindigkeit” deshalb entferne ich alle maxspeeds auf den living_streets in Deutschland wo ich sie sehe.

Ich habe mir mal angewöhnt in “maxspeed” nur numerische Werte zu schreiben. Alles andere gehört woanders hin. also maxspeed:source meinetwegen. Die Diskussion habe ich mitgelesen habe das aber weitgehend bisher ignoriert. Die Idee ist das eben klar ist woher das Maxspeed kommt. Durch Nichtbeschilderung und eine wie auch immer geartete andere rechtliche Regelung oder eben explizit durch Beschilderung.

Da allerdings “landstraße” mit “ß” oder sowas zu nehmen finde ich äusserst kaputt. Auch irgendwas nicht numerisches in maxspeed zu schreiben.

Flo

Ich fände sowas in der Art auch spannend. Muss nichtmal als Spiel konzipiert sein aber was wir ja irgendwann vollen ist eine reine “Validation” App. D.h. eine kleine App die mit Ja/Nein features/objekte/tags in der Umgebung (30m) sich bestätigen lässt.

D.h. Karte mit fettem Pfeil an einen Mülleimer - “Ist der noch da?” Ja/Nein … Wenn der noch da sein sollte ggfs ein “last_checked=" an das objekt.

Genauso könnte man:

• Öffnungszeiten
• Telefonzellen
• Postkästen
• Recyclingcontainer (Und ob sie Glas, Papier, Metall nehmen)
• Gebäude
• Geschwindigkeitsbeschränkungen
• Durchfahrtsbeschränkungen

etc abfragen. D.h. wenn ich 3 Minuten zeit habe - Ja/Nein/Weiss ich nicht.

Das man das ggfs mit Punkten versieht und high scores erzeugt - Kann man machen, ich brauche das für die Motivation nicht.

Flo

Nein - macht er nicht - ist ja auch komplizierter weil Landesabhängig:

Ich habe da mal ein ticket aufgemacht:

https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/13211#ticket

Vermutlich fehlt das aber eine API für den Validator das Land zu finden in dem sich ein Objekt höchstwahrscheinlich befindet.

Flo