> On Jan 16, 2015, at 6:22 AM, David Bannon <dban...@internode.on.net> wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 18:07 +0100, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > .... >> Some people in Poland (the ones who never browse community forums) >> maniacally tag every dirt road as highway=track, even if it should be >> residential+unpaved > > Thats is a case of "tagging for the renderer" I'm afraid. They do that > because they want to see the map show the unpaved-ness (sorry) of the > road. Clearly wrong but you can understand why they do it.
I had a quick comment, especially as I have done exactly that when I first started. I’m going back to correct some of my more glaring errors as I clean up what I had done int he past. The biggest thing to me is that is exactly what the mappers are working for - a more accurate map (the output of the renderer) and it takes a long time to get the idea that we’re tagging for a dataset, not an output for the dataset. “Those people talking about relations and semicolons have to worry about that stuff, I’m just tracing imagery in iD!” I’m guessing is the mindset. And especially where I started mapping, in central Japan which had almost no cleanup done since a data import, bringing any order to the spaghetti of badly aligned and outdated “unclassified roads” that covered everything was better than doing nothing. since there is not many obvious visible uses (to new mappers) for the mapping data beside the output rendered onopenstreetmap.org <http://onopenstreetmap.org/>, then tagging for the renderer is the only possible verifiable way to check to see what they are doing is (remotely) correct. Train stations were confusing as hell to me, as a couple broken areas made me completely flummoxed as to how to get a “station” to “show up” correctly. I worked for hours trying whatever I could to get the station to show up, assuming I was bad at tagging, and I just needed to find the right way to make it show up properly. Maybe if there were some different overlays that can be put onto the OSM site - “Usage” “surface” etc - it would be easy to see what is tagged for purpose of use (driveway) and surface tagged or untagged (paved , ground, gravel, untagged) - it might make checking existing work (for novices such as myself) much easier, especially since I’m not mapping in JSOM or aware of all these web tools everyone seems to know how to use. As an easy (well, easier) fix - it might be a good idea for iD to show, color coded, what option is chosen for a road - white for paved, grey striped for gravel and friends, and brown for various ground / soil/ mud etc. it might make it easier to tag, and easier to keep noobs like me from tagging everything dirt as a track when they want to convey that it’s not a paved road. and it would show that there is a difference between what you see in -carto and what you see in the renderers. Javbw > > I have had my say on the topic many times as has many other people. > > It does, IMHO, highlight one more aspect of this philosophy question. > People map and want to see the data they enter used in some way. That > "seeing" is an essential part of the feedback loop. We need to consider > that when looking at how people choose (or invent) tags. > > David
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
