[talk-ch] vandalism under the pretense of "simplifying"

RB tanrub at gmail.com
Tue Jun 28 05:58:43 CEST 2022

Thanks a lot for the various replies.

There are several things to unpack and the discussion is quite interesting.

Regarding the risk of "memory overload", the wiki
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Micromapping> states that "(technical)
increase of volume will increase requirements in processing power, *but
 Moore's law and  cheaper hdds every year are always there*. This might be
more complicated when we will speak about geospatial queries rather than
simple linear read/write patterns." and there isn't any clear direction
against micromapping. We are clearly dealing here with an arbitrary
decision by one user. Similar to the principle of not "mapping for the
renderer", I don't think that anyone should "map for the server",
especially when acting upon a personal intuition in contradiction with the
wiki and particularly before damaging other people's work.

Regarding the possible imprecision, as Danilo pointed out, the appropriate
way to deal with it would be to correct it / shift it, not to damage the

Finally, I understand that different people have different more or less
valid prejudices (including of course me) regarding openstreetmap. The
healthy attitude consists in mapping differently, not attacking existing
precise data. The argument thant "Valais still has so much potential" very
much also applies to the data attackers. I would like to point out that
this argument is somewhat childish considering the amount of "useful" data
that I have contributed in Valais as well as in the developing world.

Le lun. 27 juin 2022 à 22:36, Michael Flamm <michael.flamm at micoda.ch> a
écrit :

> In my point of view, the debate about the optimal precision of mapping is
> an important one. I would very much welcome inputs from experts that are
> able to evaluate potential memory overload impacts as well as increased
> rendering calculation times linked to a massive rise of the number of nodes
> for a given object.
> This being said, my main concern with « too precise » mapping is data
> maintenance over time. For a lot of objects, « Ground Truth » is not a
> permanent feature! For example, forest limits evolve over time, as well as
> parking spaces alongside a street (just to mention another parallel
> discussion thread).
> @RB: Having looked at some regions you pointed out, I saw quite a number
> of imprecise landuse cover objects if checked against the SwissImage
> aerials (that are only a few years more recent than the Digital Globe 2017
> used for your initial mapping). How are you going to restore ground truth
> for those objects? It will imply to slightly move hundreds or even
> thousands of nodes, in other words a tremendous amount of work!
> If you like precise mapping, maybe checking buildings and landuse cover in
> urban areas might bring more added value to the map? (especially in areas
> where construction works continually lead to much more relevant map
> changes).
> Le 27 juin 2022 à 16:08, Sentalize <sentalize at yahoo.de> a écrit :
> I'm not sure this is an "attack" .. in the case cited, I find the
> simplified version not that much worse. How many nodes do we want in an
> object? 10 per meter? 10'000? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of
> course, and I as well prefer a somewhat nicely rounded road than a triangle
> etc .. but it's not very clear where too much becomes too much. Extreme
> detail doesn't necessarily provide a better rendered image or more
> information and could just lead to overloaded mobile devices. But I have no
> idea where the ideal nodecount should be.
> Am Montag, 27. Juni 2022 um 11:38:26 MESZ hat RB <tanrub at gmail.com>
> Folgendes geschrieben:
> A user is destroying precise landuse mapping in Wallis. "Simplifying" in
> this case turns precise landuse cover into weird angles and destroys the
> work done by the previous contributors while harming the OSM database. Such
> moves could furthermore clearly be perceived as aggressive.
>  Typical examples of the vandalism can be observed there
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/965324922/history#map=19/46.02973/7.11287
> What is the appropriate way to react to such attacks against the project?
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/attachments/20220628/e52a12bb/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the talk-ch mailing list