Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc:
Hello,
Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before.
are you the guy that did the import ?
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc:
Hello,
Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before.
are you the guy that did the import ?
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Please take a second and zoom in...
The most common error is the deletion of a node on nearly all edited buidlings.
I verified it on OsmAnd with live update too. Same view.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On July 25, 2018 12:13 AM, marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com wrote:
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881 No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region. Regards marc marc:
Hello, Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before. are you the guy that did the import ? Regards, Marc
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Hi all,
I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61021881.
I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or just an open L-shape.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442
etc.
More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some very weird shapes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826
etc.
It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular.
It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60359203, CS60359697https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60359697 and CS60359350https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no mention in the changesets discussions of any problem.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
________________________________ Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc:
Hello,
Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before.
are you the guy that did the import ?
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
_______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Hi Nelson
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel wrote:
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Indeed: https://osm.org/go/0CYTlJg8k--?way=317495841
Any explanations why?
:Stefan
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel dikkeknodel@hotmail.com:
Hi all,
I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881.
I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or just an open L-shape.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442
etc.
More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some very weird shapes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826
etc.
It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular.
It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203, CS60359697 and CS60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no mention in the changesets discussions of any problem.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc:
Hello,
Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before.
are you the guy that did the import ?
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
I doubt that something has gone wrong. A redaction is not a revert (aka it doesn't restore a previous state of an object), so the result depends on what happened in the changeset that is being redacted.
If a building was added then it will simply vanish, if the geometry was manipulated (for example by removing and adding a node) the results might not be what is "expected".
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 09:41 schrieb Stefan Keller:
Hi Nelson
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel wrote:
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Indeed: https://osm.org/go/0CYTlJg8k--?way=317495841
Any explanations why?
:Stefan
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel dikkeknodel@hotmail.com:
Hi all,
I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881.
I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or just an open L-shape.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442
etc.
More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some very weird shapes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826
etc.
It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular.
It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203, CS60359697 and CS60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no mention in the changesets discussions of any problem.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc:
Hello,
Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before.
are you the guy that did the import ?
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Hi Simon,
I am not sure what you mean here, can you explain what you mean by ‘I doubt that something has gone wrong’?
To my understanding the redaction should have brought the nodes and ways back to the state from before the copyright infringement. For the sample of buildings I checked that state was being a rectangular way tagged as building=yes and thus also 4 nodes. Now the way has three nodes, and thus is a triangle. To me and probably most others this looks like a unsuccessful redaction.
Cheers, dikkeknodel
Van: Simon Poolemailto:simon@poole.ch Verzonden: woensdag 25 juli 2018 09:55 Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
I doubt that something has gone wrong. A redaction is not a revert (aka it doesn't restore a previous state of an object), so the result depends on what happened in the changeset that is being redacted.
If a building was added then it will simply vanish, if the geometry was manipulated (for example by removing and adding a node) the results might not be what is "expected".
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 09:41 schrieb Stefan Keller:
Hi Nelson
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel wrote:
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Indeed: https://osm.org/go/0CYTlJg8k--?way=317495841
Any explanations why?
:Stefan
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel dikkeknodel@hotmail.com:
Hi all,
I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881.
I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or just an open L-shape.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442
etc.
More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some very weird shapes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826
etc.
It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular.
It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203, CS60359697 and CS60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no mention in the changesets discussions of any problem.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc:
Hello,
Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks.
can you give an exemple ? naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). so a building should not be corrupted by this redact but it should be already corrupt before.
are you the guy that did the import ?
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Redaction tries to retain as much as possible of the work in the changesets, in particular deletions are maintained (the last time I looked at this in detail is a longish time ago, so I might be wrong, naturally it could be argued that that behaviour doesn't make sense post licence change). So in general the redaction should have been applied post revert in this case, which doesn't seem to be the case here.
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 10:09 schrieb _ dikkeknodel:
Hi Simon,
I am not sure what you mean here, can you explain what you mean by ‘I doubt that something has gone wrong’?
To my understanding the redaction should have brought the nodes and ways back to the state from before the copyright infringement. For the sample of buildings I checked that state was being a rectangular way tagged as building=yes and thus also 4 nodes. Now the way has three nodes, and thus is a triangle. To me and probably most others this looks like a unsuccessful redaction.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
*Van: *Simon Poole mailto:simon@poole.ch *Verzonden: *woensdag 25 juli 2018 09:55 *Onderwerp: *Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
I doubt that something has gone wrong. A redaction is not a revert (aka it doesn't restore a previous state of an object), so the result depends on what happened in the changeset that is being redacted.
If a building was added then it will simply vanish, if the geometry was manipulated (for example by removing and adding a node) the results might not be what is "expected".
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 09:41 schrieb Stefan Keller:
Hi Nelson
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel wrote:
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Indeed: https://osm.org/go/0CYTlJg8k--?way=317495841
Any explanations why?
:Stefan
2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel dikkeknodel@hotmail.com:
Hi all,
I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881.
I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become
triangles or
just an open L-shape.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442
etc.
More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex
with some
very weird shapes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826
etc.
It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction
version
of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular.
It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203,
CS60359697 and
CS60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in
achavi, tag
change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there
is no
mention in the changesets discussions of any problem.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc: > Hello, > > Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit : >> I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. >> Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks. > > can you give an exemple ? > naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre > (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). > so a building should not be corrupted by this redact > but it should be already corrupt before. > > are you the guy that did the import ? > > Regards, > Marc > _______________________________________________ > talk-ch mailing list > talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch > http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Hi, Why was there no notice beforehand? Or did I miss that? What are the next steps? Who is doing the cleaning up? Shall I manually correct these objects or whould that mean interfering in an ongoing procedure? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/187372890 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/414956838 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/190736456 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/333945530 While I of course appreciate the redaction work, IMHO the way it is (not) communicated is rather how not to ... Regards BAK365 ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht---- Von : simon@poole.ch Datum : 25/07/2018 - 10:29 (GMT) An : talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Betreff : Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
Redaction tries to retain as much as possible of the work in the changesets, in particular deletions are maintained (the last time I looked at this in detail is a longish time ago, so I might be wrong, naturally it could be argued that that behaviour doesn't make sense post licence change). So in general the redaction should have been applied post revert in this case, which doesn't seem to be the case here.
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 10:09 schrieb _ dikkeknodel:
Hi Simon,
I am not sure what you mean here, can you explain what you mean by ‘I doubt that something has gone wrong’?
To my understanding the redaction should have brought the nodes and ways back to the state from before the copyright infringement. For the sample of buildings I checked that state was being a rectangular way tagged as building=yes and thus also 4 nodes. Now the way has three nodes, and thus is a triangle. To me and probably most others this looks like a unsuccessful redaction.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
Van: Simon Poole Verzonden: woensdag 25 juli 2018 09:55 Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
I doubt that something has gone wrong. A redaction is not a revert (aka it doesn't restore a previous state of an object), so the result depends on what happened in the changeset that is being redacted.
If a building was added then it will simply vanish, if the geometry was manipulated (for example by removing and adding a node) the results might not be what is "expected".
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 09:41 schrieb Stefan Keller: > Hi Nelson > > 2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel wrote: >> Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion. > Indeed: https://osm.org/go/0CYTlJg8k--?way=317495841 > > Any explanations why? > > :Stefan > > > 2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel dikkeknodel@hotmail.com: >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881. >> >> >> >> I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or >> just an open L-shape. >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442 >> >> etc. >> >> >> >> More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some >> very weird shapes. >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826 >> >> etc. >> >> >> >> It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version >> of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular. >> >> >> >> It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203, CS60359697 and >> CS60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag >> change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no >> mention in the changesets discussions of any problem. >> >> >> >> Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> dikkeknodel >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc >> marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com >> Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM >> Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >> Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings >> >> witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change >> and not before ? >> >> Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit : >>> Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881 >>> >>> No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> >>> marc marc: >>> > Hello, >>> > >>> > Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit : >>> >> I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. >>> >> Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks. >>> > >>> > can you give an exemple ? >>> > naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre >>> > (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). >>> > so a building should not be corrupted by this redact >>> > but it should be already corrupt before. >>> > >>> > are you the guy that did the import ? >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Marc >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > talk-ch mailing list >>> > talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >>> > http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >>> > >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> talk-ch mailing list >>> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk-ch mailing list >> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk-ch mailing list >> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >> > _______________________________________________ > talk-ch mailing list > talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch > http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
_______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
I wouldn't fix anything right now, likely the simplest thing is to write a script that creates a new version of the objects before redaction.
What might be the issue is that the revert by Marc was redacted too.
Simon
Am 25.07.2018 um 13:20 schrieb BAK365:
Hi,
Why was there no notice beforehand? Or did I miss that? What are the next steps? Who is doing the cleaning up? Shall I manually correct these objects or whould that mean interfering in an ongoing procedure?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/187372890 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/414956838 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/190736456 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/333945530
While I of course appreciate the redaction work, IMHO the way it is (not) communicated is rather how not to ...
Regards BAK365
----Ursprüngliche Nachricht---- Von : simon@poole.ch Datum : 25/07/2018 - 10:29 (GMT) An : talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Betreff : Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings Redaction tries to retain as much as possible of the work in the changesets, in particular deletions are maintained (the last time I looked at this in detail is a longish time ago, so I might be wrong, naturally it could be argued that that behaviour doesn't make sense post licence change). So in general the redaction should have been applied post revert in this case, which doesn't seem to be the case here. Simon Am 25.07.2018 um 10:09 schrieb _ dikkeknodel:Hi Simon, I am not sure what you mean here, can you explain what you mean by ‘I doubt that something has gone wrong’? To my understanding the redaction should have brought the nodes and ways back to the state from before the copyright infringement. For the sample of buildings I checked that state was being a rectangular way tagged as building=yes and thus also 4 nodes. Now the way has three nodes, and thus is a triangle. To me and probably most others this looks like a unsuccessful redaction. Cheers, dikkeknodel *Van: *Simon Poole <mailto:simon@poole.ch> *Verzonden: *woensdag 25 juli 2018 09:55 *Onderwerp: *Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings I doubt that something has gone wrong. A redaction is not a revert (aka it doesn't restore a previous state of an object), so the result depends on what happened in the changeset that is being redacted. If a building was added then it will simply vanish, if the geometry was manipulated (for example by removing and adding a node) the results might not be what is "expected". Simon Am 25.07.2018 um 09:41 schrieb Stefan Keller: > Hi Nelson > > 2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel wrote: >> Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion. > Indeed: https://osm.org/go/0CYTlJg8k--?way=317495841 > > Any explanations why? > > :Stefan > > > 2018-07-25 8:29 GMT+02:00 _ dikkeknodel <dikkeknodel@hotmail.com>: >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881. >> >> >> >> I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or >> just an open L-shape. >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442 >> >> etc. >> >> >> >> More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some >> very weird shapes. >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826 >> >> etc. >> >> >> >> It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version >> of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular. >> >> >> >> It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203, CS60359697 and >> CS60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag >> change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no >> mention in the changesets discussions of any problem. >> >> >> >> Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> dikkeknodel >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> Van: talk-ch <talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch> namens marc marc >> <marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com> >> Verzonden: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM >> Aan: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >> Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings >> >> witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change >> and not before ? >> >> Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit : >>> Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881 >>> >>> No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> >>> marc marc: >>> > Hello, >>> > >>> > Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit : >>> >> I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. >>> >> Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks. >>> > >>> > can you give an exemple ? >>> > naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre >>> > (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). >>> > so a building should not be corrupted by this redact >>> > but it should be already corrupt before. >>> > >>> > are you the guy that did the import ? >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Marc >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > talk-ch mailing list >>> > talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch <mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch> >>> > http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >>> > >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> talk-ch mailing list >>> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk-ch mailing list >> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk-ch mailing list >> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch >> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch >> > _______________________________________________ > talk-ch mailing list > talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch > http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Simon, Marc, Thanks for your answers. Things are much clearer now. I had noticed that another mapper already started correcting some objects yesterday (CS 61035314, 61035566, 61036300). Regards, BAK365 ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht---- Von : simon@poole.ch Datum : 25/07/2018 - 13:27 (GMT) An : talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Betreff : Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
I wouldn't fix anything right now, likely the simplest thing is to write a script that creates a new version of the objects before redaction.
What might be the issue is that the revert by Marc was redacted too.
Simon
Hi!
First, sorry for any trouble caused by this redaction and thanks for bringing this issue to my attention.
The redaction algorithm tries its best to keep valid objects intact, but, as you all saw, some nodes (which were touched by the redacted data) were left disconnected from their ways (thus affecting the buildings geometries).
The buildings were restored as best as possible but if you still see any problem with them (or other kind of problem caused by the redaction), please, contact me (via email, message in OSM, ping on IRC or even through data@osmfoundation.org)
Thanks for understanding and for the patience, and again, sorry for any inconvenience.
Best regards, Nelson
Hi Nelson,
Thank you a lot for fixing this!
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
________________________________ Van: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens Nelson A. de Oliveira naoliv@gmail.com Verzonden: Thursday, July 26, 2018 12:07:29 AM Aan: Stefan Keller CC: Openstreetmap Schweiz/Suisse/Svizzera/Svizra Onderwerp: Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings
Hi!
First, sorry for any trouble caused by this redaction and thanks for bringing this issue to my attention.
The redaction algorithm tries its best to keep valid objects intact, but, as you all saw, some nodes (which were touched by the redacted data) were left disconnected from their ways (thus affecting the buildings geometries).
The buildings were restored as best as possible but if you still see any problem with them (or other kind of problem caused by the redaction), please, contact me (via email, message in OSM, ping on IRC or even through data@osmfoundation.org)
Thanks for understanding and for the patience, and again, sorry for any inconvenience.
Best regards, Nelson _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Hello,
dikkeknodel thanks for pointing out somes exemples. I revert myself the import a few weeks ago after talking with the DWG.
So the redact should not have created a new version of the objects and even less modified them, the redact should have been limited to hidding the problematic version of the objects. I'm writing to the DWG to see what happened and let you know. I think it is better to not to modify these objects in the coming hours in order to facilitate the overall fix.
Regards, Marc
Le 25. 07. 18 à 08:29, _ dikkeknodel a écrit :
Hi all,
I had a closer look at the naoliv’s redaction CS61021881 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61021881.
I see, many previously rectangular buildings have now become triangles or just an open L-shape.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495841
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317495891
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487442
etc.
More complex shapes have also lost a node and became less complex with some very weird shapes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317487614
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/317336826
etc.
It is all over the place basically. If a look to the pre-redaction version of the buildings, they seem to be nicely rectangular.
It also seems that the address data entered with CS60359203 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60359203, CS60359697 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60359697 and CS60359350 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60359350 have been (mistakenly) redacted (the blue ones in achavi, tag change only). These CSs mention local knowledge as source and there is no mention in the changesets discussions of any problem.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the redaction is my conclusion.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
*Van:* talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch namens marc marc marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com *Verzonden:* Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:13:37 AM *Aan:* talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch *Onderwerp:* Re: [talk-ch] Corrupt buildings witch building in this changeset is corrupt after naoliv change and not before ?
Le 25. 07. 18 à 01:26, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit :
Check this: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61021881
No I'm not involved in any kind of this import/region.
Regards
marc marc: > Hello, > > Le 25. 07. 18 à 00:25, Kt47uo5uVzW a écrit : >> I think the latest changesets from user 'naoliv' are erroneous. >> Can somewhere check and maybe revert this? Thanks. > > can you give an exemple ? > naoliv redact (hidde) data copied from Fribourg cadastre > (the licence of the canton of Fribourg doesn't allow it). > so a building should not be corrupted by this redact > but it should be already corrupt before. > > are you the guy that did the import ? > > Regards, > Marc
-
_ dikkeknodel -
BAK365 -
Kt47uo5uVzW -
marc marc -
Nelson A. de Oliveira -
Simon Poole -
Stefan Keller