@gileri wrote

I see that you suggest, with the fast-food example, to use the brand name as the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name.

I’m not suggesting that, just pointing out that that is the current common practice.

The landuse=residential entry is for a commercial provider of apartments, brand Avalon see https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/blob/main/data/brands/landuse/residential.json

@PlayzinhoAgro openaddresses lists quite a large number of data sources in BR, supposedly with “attribution only” licenses, are these available on OSM compatible terms or not?*

Further I think the comparison with google is a bit Apples and Oranges, a more correct question would be to ask for googles data suppliers, a question that would likely get essentially blank stares. That said IMHO the result for OSM is far better than expected.

Wikipedia while in many ways a similar project differs strongly in its “business model” and how its contents are distributed, not to mention that it operates in a very different, non-competitive market.

Simon

• Among many other flaws OA is in general useless in determining if a dataset is actually usable or not, and at best can be taken as a hint that there might be a a usable source.

Nochmals, dass ist diese https://github.com/MarcusWolschon/osmeditor4android/blob/91bf7cbbcba8a19eebdacbf34879f18b51700e99/src/main/java/de/blau/android/util/mvt/style/StyleAttribute.java#L92 Seite, die man auch da korrigieren kann..

Das ist nicht das “Hauptmenu” sondern eine Seite die von josm.openstreetmap.de geladen wird.

Originally I envisioned most of the VT config coming from ELI or the JOSM imagery configuration, however that is not happening (yet). As a result the configuration is a bit roundabout: configure the tile URL as a custom layer then load the style in to that layer via the layer “hamburger” menu.

I’ll probably add configuration of the tile URL from the “sources” section in the style for release, which will take one step out of the above procedure. Your post code data layer and style works just fine in any case within the constraints of what is supported: http://vespucci.io/tutorials/mapbox-style/

Added http://mapsplit.poole.ch/

If this coverage https://download.geofabrik.de/europe/guernsey-jersey.html is enough I’ll add it sometime today (otherwise I need a .poly file for the area in question).

@Ltrlg Zverik is both the author and operator of the imagery offset database, so I think he does know about it :-).

That said, I still think (this is not a new discussion) that the way to go is not to completely automate things but at least add support to iD (all other general purpose editors have support I believe), and at least suggest using offsets if they exist for the current imagery.

IMHO it is a bit dangerous to conflate the issue of which tools and systems the OSMF is using (aka the FOSS question), with in many ways different issue of maintaining user privacy.

The only touching point is really that FOSS communication channel software makes it easier to self host, or at least host with a trusted provider. FAANG+M are the leading contributors to OSS, but that doesn’t make them in any form a trusted provider of services.

Naturally there is a bit of a (very big and deep) culture gap at least between the US and European developer communities in this, and to generalize a bit, on the US side they are mainly seen as potential future employers (if not already the current one) and critical views are widely considered inappropriate.

Just see the already mentioned community index, or iD leaking OSM contributor information to FB by default for examples. The later which seems to be, judged by the lack of action, considered totally OK by the OSMF.

Now local communities can choose what they want, but as I’ve suggested multiple times over the years, the OSMF should provide at least one communication channel per “type” that allows contributors to participate without requiring them to create new accounts and have their data monetized. If the users take it up or not is up to them, but at least we’ve then provided the option of choice.

osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

@mmd yes there are a number of CI/CD options available with gitea. The problem is however not just one of FOSS though.

We know that providing free, essentially unlimited, computing resources is not a winning or sustainable business model, and that the party with any one specific CI is going to end after a while. So now the party at the expense of travis has ended, most projects have simply moved on to github, but at some point in time that is going to end too and the wailing and teeth gnashing will be large and loud.

IMHO moving to a self hosted software collaboration platform really only makes sense if the OSMF can provide a stable CI/CD infrastructure with it too, which naturally impacts ops a bit more than running just another service.

@blendergeek using slack is a deliberate choice of the US “community” well to be exact, some prolific members, that migrated the US community more or less “voluntarily” off IRC and other OSMF operated channels. The community index (which is what displayed by iD) is only relevant in that it was part of the “voluntarily” bit.

@xamanu while this is not really the right place for a tech dicsussion. gitea uses https://github.com/markbates/goth for OAuth support and while most of the providers are for OAuth 2.0 support at least the Xero one is 1.0a. So I’m not quite sure what would be “quite difficult” about adding OSM, work yes.

In any case does your answer imply that gitlab supports (mis-)using 1.0a?

Did the group consider recommending gitea over the (incredibly clumsy imho) gitlab?

gitea while not perfect would seem to be nearer to what we would expect from FOSS and it would seem to be substantially more realistic to implement something like authentication via osm.org than with gitlab.

osmand supposedly supports conditional access for some combinations.

But nothing is likely to support what you tagged: - maxweightrating is essentially unused compared to maxweight - conditional restriction tagging in turn restrictions isn’t supported by anybody afaik (and the comment wrt maxweightrating applies even more here) - in general the conditional tagging grammar is massively underspecified and mainly serves to humour people that think stringing long combinations of tags together is a good idea and will actually do something.

The question is, why tag it in such a complicated and likely non-functional fashion in the first place? Simply add maxweight:hgv=10 to the road segment going straight on (and if necessary any thing going off to the right) and that should force router that support maxweight:hgv to not plan the route straight on and plan a turn to the left (if you feel better about it you can add maxweightrating:hgv tags too).

There are some known issues with 15.1 that will be fixed in the January maintenance up date https://github.com/MarcusWolschon/osmeditor4android/issues (or if you are building the app yourself as soon as you re-build).

@SK53 there are some underlying architectural issues, that, if changed, would make use on large screen devices easier. Essentially it is re-factoring to allow use of the property editor in parallel with the map display. This isn’t such an issue on phones as there is no space to display it any way (though there are some other reasons why this would still be helpful).

@apm-wa to clarify this again: I’m not accusing the board of dark motives, or anything else than the best intentions. I’m just pointing out that things seem to be confused with respect to how the working groups were operating up to now and the impact of the proposed change.

Just a comment on “ I originally proposed it as a working group but was informed by old-timers that working groups may ONLY be created by the community, not by the Board,” the old timers in question must of have suffered a lapse of memory because if anything the exact opposite was true, see the board minutes I linked to.

Naturally creating a working group without community buy in the sense that there are actually people prepared to work on it is difficult, so obviously creating the working group and having people willing to serve on it tend to go hand in hand which is what might have caused the confusion.