@daniel_solow, no worries. I did it myself a couple of times.

Thanks for reading the post. I just made another pass at the wiki

osm.wiki/Tag:sport%3Dbaseball

Fun read, thanks!

Wow, you are cranking through them!

👍

Perhaps somebody could work out a procedure for quickly making relations from existing ref tags?

Hi Alan, The landuse=forest, leisure=recreation_ground, landuse=recreation_ground were missing, or on the wrong places, etc. I think they are correct now for Groton at least….

You can revert bad imports without the DWG.

The situation with highway=path, highway=footway is very annoying. Regardless of what the wiki says, in practice there is no difference between them. I would support recognizing reality and rendering them the same and render based on common sub tags like surface, access, etc.

SK53 I have yet to see any evidence that imports discourage real mapping. If you mapped locally, you would know that the playground you pointed out as being off was from the open space import in 2009, and not from the L3 parcel database, which is quite accurate. Measuring map quality from POI’s in MA is a very narrow evaluation criteria. Again, if you were local, you would know that many mappers in MA are outdoor enthusiasts, our hiking and biking trail network in the state is hands down the best and most complete source available.

Change the style based on highway= node density for the current tile.

External consumers should store the id’s of the OSM objects and process the changeset files to keep the ids up to date, tracking when the move, deleted, added, turned into area, area turning into a relation, etc.

We are around 35% the size of Wikipedia in active monthly contributors.

https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaZZ.htm

If you are looking for ideas on fixing it, you could write a python script takes an OSM file as input, and uses Shapely to chop up the relation into a bunch of smaller relations, outputting an OSC file. It would probably be ~ 25 hours of work.

Land use imports should be broken up into smaller relations when they uploaded. If you are handy with software, you might be able to pull it out, break up, delete the old data, then re-import it. You could also propose just deleting the entire thing. we should not be afraid of deleting imported data that is causing problems. You can decided what you think is best, then post an email to your local mailing lists, and see what people think.

If the people on the board can’t stand being in the same room with other and don’t trust each other enough to share the check book register and the membership list, the organization is the least of the problems. Hopefully the chemistry of the board members improves, otherwise, a reorganization would be rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Fortunately, the project marches on in spite of the dysfunctional/unhappy board.

We should allow everybody with an OSM account to vote for the board, so this process is not dominated by the top 0.0001% project.

There seems to be a lot of focus on Steve. I did not think Steve was on the board, so I don’t understand how he is responsible for anything that has happened or not happened over the past 2 years on the board. This is entire hubub is pretty confusing to those outside the OSMF inner circle….

I was not around for the last license change, and I don’t really understand how it was worked out,….

• It is surprising that a license was selected that was not compatible with Wikipedia. It seems like that should have been a show stopper issue.
• It bothers me that our so called “open/free” mapping data project is more restrictive than the US government PD data. It feels ridiculous.
• Ultimately, giving the large number of people needed for the project, the share alike clause is not needed. The project is basically un-forkable, any copy made is out of date in about 10 seconds. I don’t see how data can be mixed in after the fact without ignoring updates from OSM. If google decided that it was going to run on-going imports of OSM data, the google map maker community would immediately transition over to OSM, and we would get a zillion more eye on the data.

However, the process of changing the license now fills me with apprehension. I am not sure now is a good time to deal with this.

I like this one :-)

http://ww2.ptgrey.com/products/ladybug5/

Rendering all shop names is waiting for refactoring (version 2.x) to be completed. So, don’t bother with a patch yet, it will not be merged.

Here is the shop name issue.

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/116