Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[François Lacombe]

Hi,

Thank you to talk about this.

Definitely ok to retag remaining sub_station and station
This helps a lot to clean up power=* key.

Even if sub_station is often 1:1 of substation, this have to be replaced
carefully since objects can have been mis tagged as power=sub_station.
In France, last objects where removed this summer. There was about 150 of
them and it was not so hard to review each one.

All the best

François

*François Lacombe*

fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
www.infos-reseaux.com
@InfosReseaux 


Le lun. 22 oct. 2018 à 05:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> On 22/10/18 14:17, Daniel Koć wrote:
> > W dniu 22.10.2018 o 05:06, Dave Swarthout pisze:
> >> It would seem an easy fix to change all power=sub_station tags to
> >> power=substation without an individual inspection.
> > I'm surprised that automated conversion is discouraged on the wiki page
> > in this case. Seems like simple 1:1 objects mapping. Could we make mass
> > edition for this scheme?
>
> Agree it should be a 1:1 automated conversion.
> Possibly the warning has been a copy and paste?
> Contact with the author of the warning might be informative.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 22. Okt. 2018 um 01:17 Uhr schrieb Johnparis :

> I guess this means I am leaning towards Warin's argument. There are only
> 445 objects tagged amenity=embassy (if I read Taginfo correctly) so this
> would be pretty simple.
>


as of now there are almost 11500 amenity=embassy
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=embassy

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Volker Schmidt]

Regarding sub_station, there seems to have been  a  revert three month ago
of the results of a maproulette task
sub_station > substation.
according this changeset comment on one of the sub_station nodes
 in my area:
"revert mechanical edit of power=sub_station after complaints from the
community. this claimed to be a maproulette edit but nobody can edit 12,000
objects with the required diligence in such a short time
Edited 3 months ago by woodpeck_repair"


On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 at 11:05, François Lacombe 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thank you to talk about this.
>
> Definitely ok to retag remaining sub_station and station
> This helps a lot to clean up power=* key.
>
> Even if sub_station is often 1:1 of substation, this have to be replaced
> carefully since objects can have been mis tagged as power=sub_station.
> In France, last objects where removed this summer. There was about 150 of
> them and it was not so hard to review each one.
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
> *François Lacombe*
>
> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
> www.infos-reseaux.com
> @InfosReseaux 
>
>
> Le lun. 22 oct. 2018 à 05:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> On 22/10/18 14:17, Daniel Koć wrote:
>> > W dniu 22.10.2018 o 05:06, Dave Swarthout pisze:
>> >> It would seem an easy fix to change all power=sub_station tags to
>> >> power=substation without an individual inspection.
>> > I'm surprised that automated conversion is discouraged on the wiki page
>> > in this case. Seems like simple 1:1 objects mapping. Could we make mass
>> > edition for this scheme?
>>
>> Agree it should be a 1:1 automated conversion.
>> Possibly the warning has been a copy and paste?
>> Contact with the author of the warning might be informative.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Dave Swarthout]

Well, there you go. Mass edits are frowned upon even if the potential for
making a mistake is low. Is it worse to have a few power=sub_station
objects that should really be power=plant instead of an enormous number of
objects with deprecated tags?  Good question, but one that must remain
academic in scope.

We'll just have to wait until hell freezes over to see those deprecated
tags disappear.

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 6:09 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> Regarding sub_station, there seems to have been  a  revert three month ago
> of the results of a maproulette task
> sub_station > substation.
> according this changeset comment on one of the sub_station nodes
>  in my area:
> "revert mechanical edit of power=sub_station after complaints from the
> community. this claimed to be a maproulette edit but nobody can edit 12,000
> objects with the required diligence in such a short time
> Edited 3 months ago by woodpeck_repair"
> 
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 at 11:05, François Lacombe 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thank you to talk about this.
>>
>> Definitely ok to retag remaining sub_station and station
>> This helps a lot to clean up power=* key.
>>
>> Even if sub_station is often 1:1 of substation, this have to be replaced
>> carefully since objects can have been mis tagged as power=sub_station.
>> In France, last objects where removed this summer. There was about 150 of
>> them and it was not so hard to review each one.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> François
>>
>> *François Lacombe*
>>
>> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
>> www.infos-reseaux.com
>> @InfosReseaux 
>>
>>
>> Le lun. 22 oct. 2018 à 05:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> On 22/10/18 14:17, Daniel Koć wrote:
>>> > W dniu 22.10.2018 o 05:06, Dave Swarthout pisze:
>>> >> It would seem an easy fix to change all power=sub_station tags to
>>> >> power=substation without an individual inspection.
>>> > I'm surprised that automated conversion is discouraged on the wiki page
>>> > in this case. Seems like simple 1:1 objects mapping. Could we make mass
>>> > edition for this scheme?
>>>
>>> Agree it should be a 1:1 automated conversion.
>>> Possibly the warning has been a copy and paste?
>>> Contact with the author of the warning might be informative.
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.10.2018 o 13:07, Volker Schmidt pisze:
> Regarding sub_station, there seems to have been  a  revert three month
> ago of the results of a maproulette task


Thanks for the info - I have asked who complained, so we could talk.

I also asked the author of the wiki warning against mechanical edits and
I wait for his reaction:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Polderrunner#power.3Dsub_station_-.3E_power.3Dsubstation


> this claimed to be a maproulette edit but nobody can edit 12,000
> objects with the required diligence in such a short time


It was perfectly possible to remove 300k uses of landuse=farm in about 2
months:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/2554#issuecomment-288390777

so I guess this is also possible. Removing a "_" sign from the name
should be even easier and less error prone, because you don't even have
to choose (farmyard or farmland). Let's see!... :-)


-- 
"Excuse me, I have some growing up to do" [P. Gabriel]



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

[Mateusz Konieczny]

22. Oct 2018 06:26 by daveswarth...@gmail.com :


> I've noted with dismay the lack of debugging support for relations. For 
> example, I will get an error message when trying to upload an edited relation 
> but when I ask JOSM to Zoom to the error, the display zooms out enough to 
> include the entire relation with no clue as the where the actual problem is. 
> Same thing when you ask to "jump to the next gap". Good luck on that also. 
> Maybe it's just me?
>
> Understanding the relation editor is a tough chore. But IMO, a debugging 
> guide would be top priority on my list




Have you tried reporting this issue on JOSM bug tracker or in bug trackers of 
other editors?




Preferably after checking whatever it is already reported - I think that

it should be on

https://josm.openstreetmap.de/query?status=assigned&status=needinfo&status=new&status=reopened&component=Core+validator&max=200&order=priority
 


list if already reported ( https://goo.gl/7k7D8r  is 
shortened version of the link )/

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 5:27 AM Dave Swarthout 
wrote:

>
> Great. But what are you actually doing when you "sort the members" of a
> relation? And after sorting, how does one "ensure the members are
> connected"?
>

Sorting something like a bus route ensures that the various ways that
constitute it are connected
nose-to-tail.  This is what "ensures the members are connected" and ensures
they are connected
in a sensible fashion.  Sorta.  It may not do a good job if the route
traverses the same way in the
same direction more than once.

I've noted with dismay the lack of debugging support for relations. For
> example, I will get an error message when trying to upload an edited
> relation but when I ask JOSM to Zoom to the error, the display zooms out
> enough to include the entire relation with no clue as the where the actual
> problem is. Same thing when you ask to "jump to the next gap". Good luck on
> that also. Maybe it's just me?
>

Nope, it's not just you.  I too have problems getting my head around JOSM.
I use it when I have to,
to merge or split areas (such as when I find out that a large forest that
somebody else mapped
has two named chunks).  It's probable I find it hard to use because I don't
use it enough, which means
I don't use it much, which means...  But I also have to admit that I find
Java programs in general are
not a good fit with how my mind expects things to work and they all give me
a steeper learning curve
than non-Java programs.  Which means I try not to use them much, which
means...

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/22/18 11:03, François Lacombe wrote:
> Even if sub_station is often 1:1 of substation, this have to be replaced
> carefully since objects can have been mis tagged as power=sub_station.
> In France, last objects where removed this summer. There was about 150
> of them and it was not so hard to review each one.

I think a manual review is certainly better than an automated
conversion. If an object uses a tagging scheme that has long since been
replaced with a new one, maybe the object itself has also ceased to
exist, or demands some kind of change.

Manual review may be slower but yields a higher-quality result.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Mateusz Konieczny]

22. Oct 2018 17:28 by frede...@remote.org :


> On 10/22/18 11:03, François Lacombe wrote:
>> Even if sub_station is often 1:1 of substation, this have to be replaced
>> carefully since objects can have been mis tagged as power=sub_station.
>> In France, last objects where removed this summer. There was about 150
>> of them and it was not so hard to review each one.
>
> I think a manual review is certainly better than an automated
> conversion. If an object uses a tagging scheme that has long since been
> replaced with a new one, maybe the object itself has also ceased to
> exist, or demands some kind of change.
>
> Manual review may be slower but yields a higher-quality result.
>




I agree that manual review  of anything improbes map, but I am not sure

why mistagged power=sub_station is better or worse than mistagged

power=substation

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

[Adam Franco]

Hi Dave, all,

Based on this discussion I just recorded this short tutorial
 of how I use JOSM and its Relation Toolbox
plugin to to add adjoining land-cover areas as multipolygons with shared
boundary ways to reduce duplication and overlapping ways.

The area I'm editing, is replete with examples of this type of mapping:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.0199/-73.1530

The tools used are:
* JOSM editor - https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
* "Relation Toolbox" JOSM plugin -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Relation_Toolbox

Documentation on MultiPolygons in the OSM wiki:
* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon_Examples
* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon

For some reason I've gotten hooked on mapping landcover in my area and
spend a lot of time adding multipolygons to do so. I find them vastly
easier to manage, update, and fix than simple closed ways with overlapping
edges (how I started). As I show in the video, adding detail usually just
means splitting exiting ways and adding/subtracting using the Relation
Toolbox.

Hope this helps someone -- let me know if there are particular cases or
questions and I'd be happy to record another video covering other
situations.

Best,
Adam

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:47 AM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 5:27 AM Dave Swarthout 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Great. But what are you actually doing when you "sort the members" of a
>> relation? And after sorting, how does one "ensure the members are
>> connected"?
>>
>
> Sorting something like a bus route ensures that the various ways that
> constitute it are connected
> nose-to-tail.  This is what "ensures the members are connected" and
> ensures they are connected
> in a sensible fashion.  Sorta.  It may not do a good job if the route
> traverses the same way in the
> same direction more than once.
>
> I've noted with dismay the lack of debugging support for relations. For
>> example, I will get an error message when trying to upload an edited
>> relation but when I ask JOSM to Zoom to the error, the display zooms out
>> enough to include the entire relation with no clue as the where the actual
>> problem is. Same thing when you ask to "jump to the next gap". Good luck on
>> that also. Maybe it's just me?
>>
>
> Nope, it's not just you.  I too have problems getting my head around
> JOSM.  I use it when I have to,
> to merge or split areas (such as when I find out that a large forest that
> somebody else mapped
> has two named chunks).  It's probable I find it hard to use because I
> don't use it enough, which means
> I don't use it much, which means...  But I also have to admit that I find
> Java programs in general are
> not a good fit with how my mind expects things to work and they all give
> me a steeper learning curve
> than non-Java programs.  Which means I try not to use them much, which
> means...
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.10.2018 o 18:17, Mateusz Konieczny pisze:
> I agree that manual review  of anything improbes map, but I am not sure
>
> why mistagged power=sub_station is better or worse than mistagged
>
> power=substation
>

I think that in this case automatic update is a victim of general
thinking about automated edits. When the decision is needed, automated
edits should be banned, but there's no need for deciding anything.

Trying to do both scheme update and everything-else-by-the-way is bad,
because manual review is of course possible after automated update, and
waiting for manual action causes long term tag fragmentation.


-- 
"Excuse me, I have some growing up to do" [P. Gabriel]



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Yves]

Daniel, Mateusz and others: if nobody care to review those sub stations, this 
means they need care. 
That's more a concern than an old tag in the DB.
You want them re tagged, then advertise for this and bring other people into 
this, like in 'build a community' .
Or do it automatically and let them rot.
Yves ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[marc marc]

Le 22. 10. 18 à 14:01, Dave Swarthout a écrit :
> Well, there you go. Mass edits are frowned upon even if the potential 
> for making a mistake is low. Is it worse to have a few power=sub_station 
> objects that should really be power=plant instead of an enormous number 
> of objects with deprecated tags?

Well, ppl create a new value power=substation to get rid
of the multi-meaning (like we have with power=minor_line)
between a generator, a plant and a substation.
Trying to move the trash (the "few" remaining objects)
in one of those 3 new/clean values look strange, isn't it ?

I have checked/fixed a few power=sub_station with generator:* plant:*
142 power=station or sub_station + substation=* remain
and are easy to fix.

> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 6:09 PM Volker Schmidt wrote:
> "revert mechanical edit

the main issue is that a mecanical edit need :
- talk
- a wiki page
- widely accepted and make an exception for edits for a few dissenters 
with their edits or area... that's hard to do at the global level
and it look like that the reverted mecanical edit folling none of this.

I participated in the cleaning in France, Switzerland, Belgium.
In some countries there are only a few ambiguous objects that
the local community can quickly fix if they wanted to.

For other countries, it may be necessary to discuss an operation
at the country level. But that need a few mappers willing to relay it
the main issue look like to be in Germany ~6k sub_station and UK ~4k

Regards,
Marc
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Warin]

On 22/10/18 21:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Am Mo., 22. Okt. 2018 um 01:17 Uhr schrieb Johnparis 
mailto:ok...@johnfreed.com>>:


I guess this means I am leaning towards Warin's argument. There
are only 445 objects tagged amenity=embassy (if I read Taginfo
correctly) so this would be pretty simple.



as of now there are almost 11500 amenity=embassy
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=embassy



Very few of them have the tag diplomatic=* 

So I looked in 'my' area .. most of them did not have diplomatic=*.

So I have added the tag diplomatic based on the location (capital/non 
capital) and the content of the name (embassy/high commission/consulate 
general/consulate).

95 have been tagged embassy/high_commission in the capital.
And I have added some 33 consulates, 55 consulate generals.
They did conform to the 'rule' of embassy/high commission only in the 
capital.


Looks to be a relatively simple job... I don't think there should be any 
problem to adding the diplomatic tag as I have done using the 
information all ready available in OSM, but for safety checked with the 
locality.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Warin]

On 23/10/18 07:53, marc marc wrote:

Le 22. 10. 18 à 14:01, Dave Swarthout a écrit :

Well, there you go. Mass edits are frowned upon even if the potential
for making a mistake is low. Is it worse to have a few power=sub_station
objects that should really be power=plant instead of an enormous number
of objects with deprecated tags?

Well, ppl create a new value power=substation to get rid
of the multi-meaning (like we have with power=minor_line)
between a generator, a plant and a substation.
Trying to move the trash (the "few" remaining objects)
in one of those 3 new/clean values look strange, isn't it ?

I have checked/fixed a few power=sub_station with generator:* plant:*
142 power=station or sub_station + substation=* remain
and are easy to fix.


On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 6:09 PM Volker Schmidt wrote:
 "revert mechanical edit

the main issue is that a mecanical edit need :
- talk
- a wiki page
- widely accepted and make an exception for edits for a few dissenters
with their edits or area... that's hard to do at the global level
and it look like that the reverted mecanical edit folling none of this.

I participated in the cleaning in France, Switzerland, Belgium.
In some countries there are only a few ambiguous objects that
the local community can quickly fix if they wanted to.

For other countries, it may be necessary to discuss an operation
at the country level. But that need a few mappers willing to relay it
the main issue look like to be in Germany ~6k sub_station and UK ~4k



What would motivate people is if the renders stop rendering the old tags.
Similar to the old multipolygons .. as soon as that stooped people got going 
fixing them.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Warin]

On 23/10/18 05:04, Yves wrote:
Daniel, Mateusz and others: if nobody care to review those sub 
stations, this means they need care.

That's more a concern than an old tag in the DB.
You want them re tagged, then advertise for this and bring other 
people into this, like in 'build a community' .

Or do it automatically and let them rot.


If nobody cares then a simply auto edit. These same nobodies will not 
care if any errors of the past get replicated into the future.


Of the ones I have just reviewed, some 56 of them - 2 were potential 
errors .. one looks to have been caused by an automatic edit that was 
then incorrectly reverted .. not certain what happens there! There other 
looks to be a human error .. a turning circle and a substation on the 
same node?


So about a 4% error rate if unchecked. It is a small sample size .. so 
an error rate of, say, 8% could be forecast?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging