OSM Note 1000000

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
45 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OSM Note 1000000

Paul Johnson-3
Anybody else notice the odometer rolled over on OSM Notes?


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Dave F
Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM
time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes
are indicating locations which already exist such as building names &
parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?

I wish I could be more positive.

DaveF

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 25. May 2017, at 22:17, Dave F <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Many notes are indicating locations which already exist such as building names & parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?


some app has put a note on every amenity=parking object around here (and probably not only) which didn't have a fee and access tags. That contributed as well to the million ;-)

cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by Dave F
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dave F <[hidden email]> wrote:
Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes are indicating locations which already exist such as building names & parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?

Well, Mr. Neis says this...

OSM Notes: Closed with comment 1287 (w/o 5586), commented 409 and 7830 opened

So, I'd say north of 7500.  I'm still working on cleaning up after myself since I prolifically road tripped the first half of this decade, mostly in the southern plains.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Andreas Vilén
I follow all notes created in Sweden and close bad notes almost instantly. Mostly I miss a tool to list notes by date as I often find notes which have been resolved but not closed.

I'd say most notes are good, but they demand an active mapping team in the area. Notes from apps, especially when the app in question isn't mentioned, is often not up to par though, and some of the probably test notes.

Lately, the Swedish community has closed more notes than have been opened thanks to governmental data becoming cc0 and the new DG imagery: http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-notes-country?c=Sweden

/Andreas

Skickat från min iPhone

25 maj 2017 kl. 23:06 skrev Paul Johnson <[hidden email]>:

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dave F <[hidden email]> wrote:
Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes are indicating locations which already exist such as building names & parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?

Well, Mr. Neis says this...

OSM Notes: Closed with comment 1287 (w/o 5586), commented 409 and 7830 opened

So, I'd say north of 7500.  I'm still working on cleaning up after myself since I prolifically road tripped the first half of this decade, mostly in the southern plains.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Rafael Avila Coya
In reply to this post by Dave F
And not to talk about this note:

"The place has gone or never existed. This is an auto-generated note
from MAPS.ME application: a user reports a POI that is visible on a map
(which can be outdated), but cannot be found on the ground. (OSM data
version: 2016-12-14T16:41:03Z) #mapsme"

You have thousands of those.

Cheers,

Rafael.

On 25/05/17 22:17, Dave F wrote:

> Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM
> time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes
> are indicating locations which already exist such as building names &
> parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?
>
> I wish I could be more positive.
>
> DaveF
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 26. May 2017, at 00:24, Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> "The place has gone or never existed. This is an auto-generated note from MAPS.ME application: a user reports a POI that is visible on a map (which can be outdated), but cannot be found on the ground. (OSM data version: 2016-12-14T16:41:03Z) #mapsme"


yes, not very reliable those, I've seen many of these where the thing with the note on was clearly still there and operating



>
> You have thousands of those.


because they have millions of users. That's something positive actually.


cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Florian Lohoff-2
In reply to this post by Dave F
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 09:17:50PM +0100, Dave F wrote:
> Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my
> OSM time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many
> notes are indicating locations which already exist such as building
> names & parks. What devices are being used which don't display this
> clearly?

So who is at fault? The one mentioning somethings missing - or the one
putting some information into the map without closing the note?

I am personally using the note for a lot of purposes, and i am very
thankful we have them.

I have an RSS Feed in my reader so i can react within 24 hours for my
area of interest ...

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff                                                 [hidden email]
             UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

signature.asc (845 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Ed Loach-2
In reply to this post by Andreas Vilén

Andreas wrote:

> I follow all notes created in Sweden and close bad notes almost instantly.

> Mostly I miss a tool to list notes by date as I often find notes which have

> been resolved but not closed.

 

I don't know how he does it, but local to me user pole_climber keeps this map updated:

https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/tendring-openstreetmap-notes_97621#11/51.8345/1.2524

showing how long it has been since the note was last commented on. We use them (amongst other things) to note where planning applications have been approved so we can resurvey to add the buildings once they're complete and gain an address.

 

Not updated since April, as he only updates after he completes one of his mapping surveys. I’ve checked a few others since then.

 

Ed


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Dave F
In reply to this post by Paul Johnson-3

On 25/05/2017 22:06, Paul Johnson wrote:
OSM Notes: Closed with comment 1287 (w/o 5586), commented 409 and 7830 opened

So, I'd say north of 7500.  I'm still working on cleaning up after myself since I prolifically road tripped the first half of this decade, mostly in the southern plains.

Unsure what any of that means. Are you saying only 7500 out of 1 million are relevant? Do you have his original page?

DaveF

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Dave F
In reply to this post by dieterdreist

On 26/05/2017 07:28, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> yes, not very reliable those, I've seen many of these where the thing
> with the note on was clearly still there and operating
>> You have thousands of those.
>
> because they have millions of users. That's something positive actually.

Quantity is not quality, as you note above.

DaveF.


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Dave F
In reply to this post by Florian Lohoff-2
On 26/05/2017 09:43, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> So who is at fault? The one mentioning somethings missing - or the one
> putting some information into the map without closing the note?

I think you're missing the point. There are a large number of pointless
notes, such as mentioning things which *aren't* missing, or ones such as
this, added today: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1008125#c2036202

We have no way of communicating with this person to ask them to stop or
confirm they're intentions.

> I am personally using the note for a lot of purposes, and i am very
> thankful we have them.

I believe Notes were a reasonable idea, but poorly implemented with
little control on how they're added or their content and limited methods
of verification.

DaveF

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Michał Brzozowski
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Dave F <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I believe Notes were a reasonable idea, but poorly implemented with little
> control on how they're added or their content and limited methods of
> verification.

They're not that great because they lack any semantics, like: "needs
survey", "needs newer aerial imagery", "ongoing construction",
describing type of feature (road, building, POI) etc. (Hashtag-like
labels would do, as long as local communities would stick to the
standard).
There was also a suggestion by me and others of optional e-mail
notifications for anonymous note makers.
Actually, if there were any way to indicate those, we could show them
as StreetComplete quests or even as push notifications to willing map
users (just like Google does).

Then there's also that anonymous person who flooded the hell out of
China with not really useful notes in Russian. Maybe a (quite
liberally given out, but still giving any hope of blocking abusers)
API key for anonymous notes would be a solution?

Michał

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Jean-Marc Liotier
In reply to this post by Rafael Avila Coya
On Fri, 26 May 2017 00:24:15 +0200
Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> And not to talk about this note:
>
> "The place has gone or never existed. This is an auto-generated note
> from MAPS.ME application: a user reports a POI that is visible on a
> map (which can be outdated), but cannot be found on the ground. (OSM
> data version: 2016-12-14T16:41:03Z) #mapsme"

Why doesn't damn MAPS.ME produce those bloody notes with the name of
the place instead of "The place" ? That way they could be useful
instead of being a nuisance.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Jean-Marc Liotier
In reply to this post by Dave F
On Thu, 25 May 2017 21:17:50 +0100
Dave F <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM
> time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes
> are indicating locations which already exist such as building names &
> parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?
>
> I wish I could be more positive.

This is actually quite positive: at least this pollution is channeled
into notes instead of touching the actual data !

Ok, there could probably be lots more positivity...

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Dave F

2017-05-26 11:56 GMT+02:00 Dave F <[hidden email]>:
Quantity is not quality, as you note above.


Quality concerns are part of the reason why notes were introduced: to give an easy feedback possibility without a risk to damage actual map data. as long as we can deal with incoming notes, it is OK. If they're beginning to pile than we could require a feedback address (login or some other kind of auth) to reduce the quantity and to raise the chance for actual communication in case of questions.

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Dave F
(Could repliers please 'To:' the OSM list *not* the personal address of the sender)

On 26/05/2017 13:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

2017-05-26 11:56 GMT+02:00 Dave F <[hidden email]>:
Quantity is not quality, as you note above.


Quality concerns are part of the reason why notes were introduced: to give an easy feedback possibility without a risk to damage actual map data.

But the feedback is majoritively of a poor quality, providing little improvement to the OSM database

as long as we can deal with incoming notes, it is OK. If they're beginning to pile than we could require a feedback address (login or some other kind of auth) to reduce the quantity and to raise the chance for actual communication in case of questions.

I'd be happy with 10 million notes as long as they led to an increase in accuracy of the OSM database. Unfortunately that's just not the situation.

DaveF.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Andy Townsend
In reply to this post by Jean-Marc Liotier
On 26/05/2017 11:31, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> Why doesn't damn MAPS.ME produce those bloody notes with the name of
> the place instead of "The place" ? That way they could be useful
> instead of being a nuisance.

I've just added https://github.com/mapsme/omim/issues/6136 saying
exactly that.



_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM Note 1000000

Florian Lohoff-2
In reply to this post by Dave F
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:17:00AM +0100, Dave F wrote:

> On 26/05/2017 09:43, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> >So who is at fault? The one mentioning somethings missing - or the one
> >putting some information into the map without closing the note?
>
> I think you're missing the point. There are a large number of
> pointless notes, such as mentioning things which *aren't* missing,
> or ones such as this, added today:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1008125#c2036202
>
> We have no way of communicating with this person to ask them to stop
> or confirm they're intentions.
Instead of complaining and continuing the bullshit - close it? Its a
single click - easy as it is ...  We want the feedback and the barrier
should be low - accept a bad signal to noise ratio - dont take notes
with a number as serious ...

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff                                                 [hidden email]
             UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

signature.asc (845 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

to and cc of list replys - Was: OSM Note 1000000

Florian Lohoff-2
In reply to this post by Dave F
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 01:46:42PM +0100, Dave F wrote:
> (Could repliers please 'To:' the OSM list *not* the personal address
> of the sender)

Thats personal preference - i'd like to be added aswell as the list.
This has been the default behaviour since the 80s on all lists
especially for high volume ones.

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff                                                 [hidden email]
             UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

signature.asc (845 bytes) Download Attachment
123