When I see your profile’s image, mvexel’s, I’m interested to know if your are the son of Chuck Norris.This striking resemblance, it’s disturbing….

We should not vote on new tagging schemes, we should support them - or not.

But this does not work as well. You create multiple and parallel solutions for the same problem, depending only on decision made by a few number of data consumers.

It’s true that proposals are often accepted with a low number of votes and where the result is still unsatisfactory. We can all dream about a dictator or great engineer taking perfect decisions making everyone happy but this only exists in books, not in real live.

About the low number of votes, it’s like in real democratic system. Only non-voters have to be blamed, not the one who expressed their opinion. But as I said several times in the past, the words “vote” and “approved” are incorrect. We should better say “opinion pole” and “best reply”.

Vous noterez la présence sur la photo d’un gâteau qui vole. Bravo au photographe.

Je ne mettrais pas place=village pour Vermondans. Ca serait possible si l’ancien village était isolé mais comme il fait partie d’une seule agglomération au sein de Pont-de-Roide, il serait plus logique de mettre “place=quarter” (il faut être sûr de l’emplacement)

I just discover this list. It’s even missing in the MailingList wiki page. I’m surprised by the answer of Alyssa here which tells me that we should never reply before taking time for a deep breath. Btw, who is the other moderator ? I also had a bad experience on the import list with a moderator that blocked me on the import list (if I remember correctly) several days for really nothing (or something that way maybe overinterpreted when you express yourself in a foreign language). I think we need a coach for our ML moderators or a moderator for moderators ;-)

As I said, it is to discuss about a proposal, not to store the proposal itself. It is not more and not less of what the wiki “Talk” page is doing. Excepted that you don’t have the learn the wiki syntax.

I went through the arguments of this wiki-better-than-email but none of them is valid in our context. Our tagging mailing list is not providing “material of any substance”. It’s just discussions around what will go into the wiki page exactly like we have in the wiki “Talk” pages. The “signal to noise”, “search” and “PD” are not relevant as well (use google tip “site:” if you like). Some people don’t like mailing list because they simply don’t have a correct email client supporting mailing lists.
They are counter arguments about the wiki. The main being that many people simply never used a wiki until they wanted to discuss about a tagging proposal. Don’t forget that our audience is not limited to nerds.
I agree on one point : the process to adopt a tag can be heavy and slow. But you can bypass this process and simply use your owns. By doing this, you also take the risk that your tag is undocumented or badly documented and then unproperly used or interpreted by others. You also have to understand that tags are not just a wiki and a k/v in a database. When you create a tag, you also want that this tag is used by others and not only for rendering. Once a tag is adopted by data consumers, it is very hard to modify them (although not impossible, I did this for the tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency=aed in the past.

Launch is planned for april 2015 for the first satellite. About the attribution “contains Copernicus data (year of reception)”, perhaps a mention on the contributors specific attributions on the wiki would be enough.

The main OSM server(s) has been planned for maintenance and quick downtime the 26th. See the announcement here : https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/announce/2014-October/000091.html

Your josm upload issue is probably related.

One question from a non-US contributor: what is recommended if we find a TIGER imported road in OSM which seems to not exist at all on imagery like this one:
way/16481479

simply delete the way ? or change the tags to ‘disused:’ or ‘razed’ ?

I think too the relation type=building is the problem. If the block is a single building, then create a multipolygon relation. If it is different buildings, then create a surrounding polygon for the tower (or keep the tower tags only on the tower polygon)

1/ C’est un parvis comme il en existe bcp, généralement piéton et cycle. Celui là est autour d’une église, mais ça peut être une place dallé piétone ou tout autres parvis du même genre. Je dois admetre que je me suis touours demandé comment taguer les trottoirs et ces choses du genre qui sont à la foi area et way.

Pour le parvis, c’est alors highway=pedestrian + area=yes + bicycle=yes

Pour les trottoirs, c’est plus délicat. Peu de gens descendent à ce niveau de détail pour l’instant. Et si on cartographie la surface du trottoir, il faut aussi le faire pour les zones de parquage voiture, les petits coins d’herbes ou de fleurs, etc. En fait, il existe des expériences très locales qui s’arrêtent très vite lorsque les contributeurs se rendent compte de l’ampleur de la tâche…

Donc, Pieren, si je saisis bien, j’ajoute le tag motorhead sur le primary ?

Si il y a bien un panneau C107, route pour automobiles, oui pour “motorroad=yes” (hein, et pas “motorhead” qui est un groupe de musique métal qui n’a rien à voir ici ^^)

comment je tag un une surface bétonné d’un place?

Ca dépend de la place… est-ce ouvert à la circulation automobile ? aux piétons ? est-ce une place de marché ? un parking ?

Si c’est ouvert aux voitures, il faut un highway=residential+arey=yes (ou unclassified). Si c’est ouvert aux piétons, c’est plutot un highway=pedestrian+area=yes (ajouter un bicycle=yes si on veut pour les cyclos). Si ça n’est aucun de ces deux cas, il faut nous en dire plus sur la fonction de cette place.

Pour le panneau C107, ça veut dire “voie pour automobiles”. Ca ne veux pas forcément dire que c’est une voie express. En France, on nous a signalé des voies express qui étaient ouvertes aux vélos (eh oui, c’est très dangereux mais ça existe !). Et il y a aussi des voies pour automobiles qui ne sont pas express (limitées à 90kmh). Le mieux serait donc d’utiliser le tag “motorroad” pour le panneau C107 au lieu d’ajouter tout un tas de tags access. Voir motorroad=* . J’en ai déjà parlé sur le forum mais il faudrait qu’on remette le sujet sur le tapis sur la liste de discussion et surtout adapter le wiki qui est assez ancien sur ce sujet. Le wiki - et moi-même - a longtemps fait la confusion entre “voie express” et “voie pour automobiles” alors que ce sont deux choses différentes qui parfois n’en font qu’une seule.

Add comments to your changes to explain them.

This is the limits of this “comment” system. In fact, nobody reads elements history and related changeset comments when they edit/modify a road.

Add source=local knowledge tags to your changes

This is probably the best solution (or source=survey)

That’s not the question : everywhere in the world, OSM started with a small community ! And everywhere we have positive contributions and negative contributions. It works until now because we have much more positive contributions than negative ones…

You did not catch the spirit of the project : if you start to protect data, it’s not anymore a crowd-sourced spatial database. I follow OSM since 7 years and I red similar complains since the beginning. If the model of contribution would fail, the project wouldn’t be so successful as it is today and the map so complet in many areas.
But you point out a real issue : with iD editor, you can remove an element which belongs to a relation without any warning. This is not the case with JOSM. Instead of complaining, you should open a bug ticket for the iD devs : https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD

It’s seems the TIGER 2012 dataset is much better than first TIGER imported in OSM. Is something planned by the US community about this dataset ? a new import ? conflation ?

Thank you for taking the time to write this interesting and detailled feedback. I’m sure it will be helpful for other imports around the world.