This post made my morning.

Interesting - considered adding a page on the wiki about this?

osm.wiki/GPS_Reviews

This is a classic example of whats known as “tagging for the renderer”

“When someone wants to leave the OSM community then it should be made easier for them to do so. The settings page should be made to cover this option.”

Huh? So what happens to any data they’ve contributed? The database needs to keep a paper trail of everything that users have done. And we preferably need a way of contacting everyone who’s made a contribution. So what are versions of objects a “deleted” user has made associated with from then on? Do you propose we just have these mysterious “blanks”?

“Also I think we should differentiate between users and contributors”

I disagree.

Also, bonus point for OSMF conspiracy theory.

We don’t necessarily want to delete these peoples accounts as there’s nothing stopping them becoming actual users at some point in the future. Them already having an account lowers the annoyance barrier to getting them to make an edit.

If anything we should be poking these users somehow encouraging them to make their first edit.

This was a good hack weekend.

BAN POTLATCH, WY!

spam

SEO == spam

“I plan to transfer the 9-1-1 street data into OSM as I see missing segments.”

Please make sure the license allows you to do this before you start.

Well, it is a road. It is possible to traverse it with a vehicle. It’s just a very minor one.

The attitude to have is “well, I’d better get the rest of them in then” rather than “I’d better delete this so it looks consistent”.

Otherwise when someone added the first power line in germany, someone else would have gone “can’t have this - none of the others are mapped - it looks wrong” and deleted it. Instead people continued to add to it and we now have the entire german power grid.

Did you ever get to the bottom of your Church Street-related problem? A few strange tags on something?

It’s possible that it’s a problem with the garmin file, after all the format is completely reverse engineered using the dark arts, so it’s quite possible there’s a subtle point os the format the authors are missing there.

“I’m pretty sure we discussed the OS Locater musical chairs tool since ris was there”

Not sure we did seeing as my brain is now filled with my next, less sane, project.

The main thing wrong with this I would say is the way the northern connections to the roundabout are made. The “on” flares share the same nodes as the “off” flares. A router will think it’s possible to traverse from the road on the east to the road on the north without traversing the roundabout at all.

A router generating a list of directions won’t list this as a “take first exit on roundabout”. It may even decide not to generate a turn instruction if many of the two ways tags are the same.

Hi there.

Bonzer!

You can always try JOSM if you find Potlatch a bit fiddly. People who are more technically-minded tend to prefer it (e.g. people who have used CAD programs in the past).

I don’t think people are really objecting to the business name being put on - it’s just that it’s been done in a rather clueless way showing their complete misunderstanding of how mapping works.

“add:Business Type: = Internet Marketing”

I think says it all.

Reckon you should hit them with a cluebat.

Oh man I wish I’d been there.

Hooray!