Please only use the OSM diary for topics relating to OSM.

Same here, makes for interesting moments when I show pictures of my kids and then have to skip through 50 pictures of street signs :p

Geograph is an Interesting project, but at 1 photo per km2 there must be a huge amount of editoring happening (and therefore more interesting photos) compared to mapillary’s default “0.5 photo per second, upload first check later”.

Ahhh… Creating the initial road network may be just a small part of the job, but it remains the most satisfying :)

Apparement tout vient d’un import par Becker_MN_Import_Acc. Ça vaudrais le coup de jetter un oeuil aux autres changesets, et de contacter le compte en question.

No war going on, those posts are simply transparency statements by HOT board candiates. So that voters can take this into account in case the candidate’s other affiliations conflict with board membership.

So… You want the overpass output and specification, but without the overhead of a full complicated db query each time ?

edit -> preferences -> advanced -> simplify -> 0.3 or nearby is much more reasonable than the default 3.0.

Commented on the changeset.

While the prize is well below the typical going rate for that kind of service (unless you consider the mere publication of your photo as a worthy prize in itself), the contest is just a classic “extract value from enthusiastic customers” marketing ploy. Nothing that OS should be proud of, but no reason for onlookers to be up in arms either ?

Une autre solution plus simple avec JOSM (pas de configuration nécessaire) : zoomer jusqu’à voir la version qui vous interesse, puis click droit sur le fond de carte et décocher “zoom automatique”.

Makes you wonder how those fixmes aere added in the first place. Did the tiger data mention “dual carriageway” but only provide a single line ?

Once you’ve exhausted the mundane, maybe you can use the magic of aggregated gps traces to find which side streets are only turned into from one driving direction.

It’s clear that there is some uncertainty around AS that harms its adoption. That should be fixed, but right now the debate has become so entrenched that any wiki edit feels like a political statement.

However, I am not turning it into a “collection of all objects with the same addr:street”. AS members by definition don’t have an addr:street tag.

Your rethorical question is also plain trollbait, as the pros and cons have been largely debated and each scheme has good arguments. AS handles some usecases that addr:street cannot; the workflow and newbie-friendlyness has been debated to no end with no clear winner (not because people aren’t convinced, but because they are convinced by opposed conclusions).

At this stage, please realize that neither AS nor addr:street is going to be deprecated or dissapear from the db. Keep calm and carry on mapping using your prefered scheme. Go improve the tools and the documentation.

@d1g I’d certainly defend keeping only one of relation:street and relation:associatedStreet, but the relation:street doesn’t have much of a technical advantage and is 10x less popular. So ‘street’ would be the one to go.

@d1g There’s no documentation of what tags to apply to the members because there’s nothin special abou them. IMHO the relation itself shouldn’t have any tag other than “type=associatedStreet”, and editors should be able to grab the name from the street member for display purposes.

@AndiG88 I really don’t understand your issue with the workflow. If you’re willing to search, you’ll find all objects (house, street, relation) in one go with both schemes, there’s no difference here (or if you want to nitpick, the addr:street schema makes searching more complicated because you need to search for either name=* or addr:street=*). And in many cases you don’t need to search : you just click on the street or house, then on the relation and voilà - all the info you need.

You don’t have to touch the relations at all to update the street name. Go ahead and remove the name tag from the relation if it bothers you, it’s only cosmetic, it’s used neither for routing nor for rendering. And hey, maybe the rename is only for one section of the road, with the original mapper having wrongly assumed that all the streets were named the same. Happened to me more than once.

Concerning “loose” addresses: mixing two tagging schemes on one street is going to be more work, so don’t do that. Consider the pros and cons of each scheme individually.

No matter how you put it, that “simple find” is always going to me more work than “two clicks” or “nothing” (depending on the modification you’re doing).

QA tools such as osmi handle missing/mismatched street addresses just as well for both schemes.

What’s wrong with that screenshot ? Multiple AS for the “same” street can be usefull, it’s up to the contributor to decide wether it is or not. The “easyer to change street names” quality still applies. With addr:street you’d get even more duplication, and finding all houses associated with a street require a search instead of 2 clicks.

De plus, Google et son streetview sont rarement suffisament à jour pour des POIs de centre-ville. Même s’il était légalement possible d’utiliser les données et/ou images de Google pour ajouter des boutiques dans OSM, ça ne serais probablement pas une bonne idée.

YMMV, I really don’t like forum interfaces. And yet-another place to find info I want ? Nah. I’m subscribed to tagging, but that doesn’t mean that I read all threads.

The forum vs mailinglist (vs $FOOMEDIUM) debate will never die out, because each has its own advantages. As Richard pointed out, you can use a forum-like interface for mailinglists. The reverse is not always the case for forums (I’ve never looked at the osm forum so I don’t know in that case).

Mapbox and Telenav are two companies (out of the top of my head, maybe osm.wiki/Companies lists others) that employ full-time mappers. You could try contacting them for a once-off single-area job.

Regarding the “maps for self-driving cars” idea, AFAIK those cars currently need very detailed maps. Armchair mapping certainly isn’t sufficient. OSM still has good but not stellar data for for the satnavs usecase (missing width, lanes, restrcitions), so I think than osm-based self-driving cars are a bit far off.

Contrary to imports, there’s no such thing as a tagging approval process. There are conventions to help reaching consensus, which is quite different. OSM has always been pretty much the “let’s allow things to happen, then fix them when they break” phylosophy.

The “descriptive vs normative” can be a bit hard to navigate, but really the wiki should do both, and it usually does. Many pages describe both “what’s in the db” and “what is the prefered method”.

The wiki certainly does need TLC. The “process” to tidy the wiki is to just do it. That doesn’t necessarily mean conclude the discussion, but the pros and cons of each view can be more clearly documented.

The level of bureaucraty is subjective. You’re turning people away for reasons I wouldn’t have batted an eylid about.

OSM has loads of communication channels. Many people actually prefer mailing lists, but there’s IRC, a forum, blogs, social media, private messages and changeset comments… You name it. Besisdes, you want to fix wiki-related problems by adding another wiki ??

That’s very close to what the french community did with their BANO dataset : essentially a big CSV of addresses with many sources, tools to compare back and forth between BANO and osm, and the ultimate long-term goal of getting most of it merged into osm.