Hi all,
I could use your advice how to resolve a conflict with another editor.
Three weeks ago I recorded a few GPS traces of hiking paths in the Bergell / Bregaglia valley and used them to create relations for the Via Panoramica (relation 14414965) and the Via Bregaglia (relation 14425116) with a variant via Bondo (relation 14425264), all according to the physical signposts on the ground.
When I looked again a couple of weeks later I found that my Via Panoramica had been deleted and my Via Bregaglia changed in a massive changeset (124772603) touching 157 ways, 27 relations and 236 nodes, with no source or explanation. There are two new "Sentiero Panoramico" / "Via Panoramica" relations (14449302 and 14449306), neither of which conforms to my survey trace nor the official Switzerland Mobility map. I'm not sure what has changed in the Via Bregaglia relations. A number of tags have been dropped from all of the above relations, others replaced by, in my view, incorrect ones.
(I had actually added another Via Bregaglia relation according to the tourist office website. From this, all but one member were dropped. But that website has multiple contradictory maps and descriptions, so I don't trust it and don't mind too much that this relation was practically deleted.)
So I started a discussion of the changeset with its editor: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124772603 I tried not to ask everything at once, so didn't even get to the missing tags, yet. But you can see how the discussion has been going. After two responses the other editor seems to have fallen silent. I'd give him a few more days, though.
I do not see any indication how his changes were improvements over my work. What I would like to get to is have my Via Panoramica relation and the dropped tags restored. Ideally, I could convince the other editor to do this but I'm not too optimistic.
What do you think? How should I proceed? (Feel free to respond in German if you prefer.)
Thanks for any advice, Oreg2
Dear Oreg2,
I have read through the change set discussion and had a quick look on the change set using https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=124772603. My advice would be to give the author a few more days to respond - it might be that the weekend is better suited to compile an answer, although the author seems to be very active looking at other change sets. I can clearly follow your arguments in the discussion, specifically the claimed source for the changes does not sound very reliable compared to an investigation on the ground. Also changing a cross-border relation and deleting relevant and correct information is just not right. However having a glance at the author's change history and activity overall I do hope you get a better response and willingness to work on this together.
Regards, Kai
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: talk-ch talk-ch-bounces@openstreetmap.ch Im Auftrag von Oreg2 Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. August 2022 17:17 An: talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch Betreff: [talk-ch] editor conflict
Hi all,
I could use your advice how to resolve a conflict with another editor.
Three weeks ago I recorded a few GPS traces of hiking paths in the Bergell / Bregaglia valley and used them to create relations for the Via Panoramica (relation 14414965) and the Via Bregaglia (relation 14425116) with a variant via Bondo (relation 14425264), all according to the physical signposts on the ground.
When I looked again a couple of weeks later I found that my Via Panoramica had been deleted and my Via Bregaglia changed in a massive changeset (124772603) touching 157 ways, 27 relations and 236 nodes, with no source or explanation. There are two new "Sentiero Panoramico" / "Via Panoramica" relations (14449302 and 14449306), neither of which conforms to my survey trace nor the official Switzerland Mobility map. I'm not sure what has changed in the Via Bregaglia relations. A number of tags have been dropped from all of the above relations, others replaced by, in my view, incorrect ones.
(I had actually added another Via Bregaglia relation according to the tourist office website. From this, all but one member were dropped. But that website has multiple contradictory maps and descriptions, so I don't trust it and don't mind too much that this relation was practically deleted.)
So I started a discussion of the changeset with its editor: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124772603 I tried not to ask everything at once, so didn't even get to the missing tags, yet. But you can see how the discussion has been going. After two responses the other editor seems to have fallen silent. I'd give him a few more days, though.
I do not see any indication how his changes were improvements over my work. What I would like to get to is have my Via Panoramica relation and the dropped tags restored. Ideally, I could convince the other editor to do this but I'm not too optimistic.
What do you think? How should I proceed? (Feel free to respond in German if you prefer.)
Thanks for any advice, Oreg2 _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
The editor in question has a bit of a controversial history in OSM (for similar reasons as the current disagreement and including making undesirable edits in CH). If you can't get a satisfactory resolution, I would suggest taking the mater up with the DWG.
Further, please do not use maps / plans / and similar works for OSM that are not available of clearly compatible terms or for which we have explicit permission for use in OSM.
Simon
Hello,
Le 24.08.22 à 17:17, Oreg2 a écrit :
I could use your advice how to resolve a conflict with another editor.
- restore your relation and add a note on it to warn that a talk is ongoing. it's to avoid having conflict if you want to restore it later with too many change that affect it (way splited for ex)
- conflict of source: i'm not sure about the validity of the source, but if a plan conflicts with the itinerary on the ground, it seems clear to me that the ground takes precedence.
for the rest of the discussion and the changeset, I am afraid that it is too long to achieve anything
Regards, Marc
How about cantonal projects? I'm atm working in the Tessin and ..... boy does this Canton need help...... it's state is mind numbingly bad :) It's a nightmare to map, too, since the rustici are very irregular and connect into all directions with each other, there's a million dead/ruined buildings in the forests (visible by LIDAR) and a lot of the Cantone has obviously been mapped on very old, imprecise Sat/Airfotos.
IMHO, it'd make sense, if a lot of mappers would throw themselves at a Cantone in this state in a project of the month as well? Cheers, Philippe
Hello,
Le 25.08.22 à 14:07, Sentalize a écrit :
How about cantonal projects?
I think it's a good idea to focus together on a place that needs it. but in my opinion, to have more impact, you should limit yourself to one or two main areas (addr, road, building, landuse, ....) or multi-topis but splited in into municipality or small area.
For example, I'd be happy to map ruins if it's a project of the month, but I must admit that I'm not very motivated by the lack of direct use.
By comparison adding missing street names motivates me much more because it is an important and disqualifying use for osm (if a user searches for a street name in OsmAnd and finds nothing, he risks switching to a proprietary solution)
but maybe this is not the main concern of Tessin, you tell us.
Regards, Marc
1) if it's helpful, I can try to do an analysis of different regions that are missing data. For examples maybe somewhere actually has very few buildings, I could look to see if the Microsoft buildings open data are detected there however, and then we know that we should improve that town or region. But probably it is a rare thing.
2) For me personally, one of my favorite topics is sidewalks. Few are mapped in Switzerland I think, but many are easily visible in the aerial imagery. I would suggest to choose towns with major train stations first and prioritize mapping sidewalks there, move to a new town each month. In the long term, mapping sidewalks in every town accessible by train will help give pedestrians an idea of where to walk when exiting a train, if they need such detail.
3) a final suggestion is perhaps we have a quarterly day trip. Travel to a town, and we can focus on spending a full day exploring it and adding various details, primarily Points of Interest, especially with mobile apps like Vespucci and Every Door, but we could even consider using Mapillary, drone imagery, or just field notes to then do some detailed editing with the laptop and a Stange.
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 15:18 Marc M. marc_marc_irc@hotmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Le 25.08.22 à 14:07, Sentalize a écrit :
How about cantonal projects?
I think it's a good idea to focus together on a place that needs it. but in my opinion, to have more impact, you should limit yourself to one or two main areas (addr, road, building, landuse, ....) or multi-topis but splited in into municipality or small area.
For example, I'd be happy to map ruins if it's a project of the month, but I must admit that I'm not very motivated by the lack of direct use.
By comparison adding missing street names motivates me much more because it is an important and disqualifying use for osm (if a user searches for a street name in OsmAnd and finds nothing, he risks switching to a proprietary solution)
but maybe this is not the main concern of Tessin, you tell us.
Regards, Marc _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Ciao Christopher
On 25 Aug 2022, at 15:28, Christopher Beddow christopher.beddow@gmail.com wrote:
- For me personally, one of my favorite topics is sidewalks. Few are mapped in Switzerland I think
You should see how it’s been done in Bern: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1682378#map=17/46.95076/7.43156 :) All mapped by https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/keujfl839237 which as last action changed his username and completely disappeared from our small community two years ago.
Otherwise I like your suggestions!
Cheers, Habi
I think it's a good idea to focus together on a place that needs it. but in my opinion, to have more impact, you should limit yourself to one or two main areas (addr, road, building, landuse, ....) or multi-topis but splited in into municipality or small area.
Okay, then maybe a Valley (like the Maggia valley) etc. Also interesting, how everbody has his very own focus in OSM. Personally, I like beautifying alls sorts of tracks etc. High precision is maybe less required for point to point navigation, but essential for hikers, especially in dangerous areas like mountains etc :)
Not for the 1st time: please start a new thread when you are starting a new topic.
Anyway, that the Ticino is quite under mapped is a long term issue (and there are some clear reasons for it). From a bang for the buck pov I would likely concentrate on adding addresses in Lugano and Bellinzona as these are the largest cities (in the whole country) with very very little coverage (15 and 7%), not sure what the POI, speed limit and access coverage looks like but probably not good either. Mapillary coverage could help with the later two.
Mapping rustici wouldn't be high on my list of things to do, but YMMV.
SOSM has been thinking about having a larger event in TI for a while, but covid has thrown a bit of a spanner in to the original planning. We do have a potential location and are likely going to revive the idea for next year.
Simon
Am 25.08.2022 um 14:07 schrieb Sentalize:
How about cantonal projects? I'm atm working in the Tessin and ..... boy does this Canton need help...... it's state is mind numbingly bad :) It's a nightmare to map, too, since the rustici are very irregular and connect into all directions with each other, there's a million dead/ruined buildings in the forests (visible by LIDAR) and a lot of the Cantone has obviously been mapped on very old, imprecise Sat/Airfotos.
IMHO, it'd make sense, if a lot of mappers would throw themselves at a Cantone in this state in a project of the month as well?
Cheers,
Philippe
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Hi Simon
Not for the 1st time: please start a new thread when you are starting a new topic.
Oops. I was merely replying to the mailing list and setting a topic and was under the assumption that this creates a thread. I guess I have to write a new mail instea dof a reply then. It's also the only mailing list I use, I'm more of a forum person, sorry.
Mapping rustici wouldn't be high on my list of things to do, but YMMV.
Well I kind of like landscape, whatever is there. Houses, roads, charging stations, trees, rivers.... .. Rustici are quite often simply the houses of a town in a valley like the maggia valley, not necessarily single houses on mountain ranges. They're a nightmare, though, because other tha a modern town area, these things have weird angles and cling together like magnets. Adresses and cities are not my thing, I leave that to others, I prefer to be "out in the wild". I have more of a nature & hiking mind, than a car navigation mind.
SOSM has been thinking about having a larger event in TI for a while, but covid has thrown a bit of a spanner in to the original planning. We do have a potential location and are likely going to revive the idea for next year.
Neat ... especially now that there's swissimage etc, it quite helps.
Cheers, Philippe _______________________________________________ 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
Thank you all for the advice.
I'll wait a few more day and then try again to talk to him. Restoring the deleted relation in the meantime sounds like a good idea.
I'm not sure what to do if the discussion fails. The description of the DWG mission sounds like they deal only with much more serious cases. Also, it probably makes more sense to add more data to OSM elsewhere rather than spend a lot of time on this dispute. At least it seems I made no major mistakes in dealing with it so far.
Cheers, Oreg2
Just be chill to each other .. there's no point into going into an "I'm right" war here. I doubt he's trying to destroy anything on purpose, this is just about two mappers thinking their version is the right one.He also has valid points, like knowing the ways actually do have a number etc, so try to work it out together, instead of going into a blockade .. that'd help nobody.
Am Donnerstag, 25. August 2022 um 14:31:51 MESZ hat Oreg2 gero.spammann@gmail.com Folgendes geschrieben:
Thank you all for the advice.
I'll wait a few more day and then try again to talk to him. Restoring the deleted relation in the meantime sounds like a good idea.
I'm not sure what to do if the discussion fails. The description of the DWG mission sounds like they deal only with much more serious cases. Also, it probably makes more sense to add more data to OSM elsewhere rather than spend a lot of time on this dispute. At least it seems I made no major mistakes in dealing with it so far.
Cheers, Oreg2 _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Am 25.08.2022 um 14:31 schrieb Oreg2:
..
I'm not sure what to do if the discussion fails. The description of the DWG mission sounds like they deal only with much more serious cases. Also, it probably makes more sense to add more data to OSM elsewhere rather than spend a lot of time on this dispute. At least it seems I made no major mistakes in dealing with it so far. ..
The DWG would surely be more than happy if they didn't have to become involved, but on the other hand the mapper in question has a history of fights and has been blocked many times by the DWG. Walking away if the specific disagreement can't be resolved in a satisfactory fashion, will likely just be kicking the can down the road.
-
Christopher Beddow -
David Haberthür -
kai.pankrath＠gmx.de -
Marc M. -
Oreg2 -
Sentalize -
Simon Poole