piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Taya_S (2024-02-18 13:09:25+00:00): Hi Ewan,

There are actually a few waivered datasources available. I've been using https://www.dea.ga.gov.au/products/dea-intertidal-extents for tidalflats.

There is also https://www.dea.ga.gov.au/products/dea-coastlines for coastlines (to use that one it will first need to be mentioned in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Geoscience_Australia).

Both datasources lack the accuracy to properly map the coastline IMO. Both are based on low resolution landsat imagery. The coastlines dataset has difficulties with mangrove forests, low tides and it also ignores narrower tidal creeks. 

To explain my method of drawing the coastline. I'm using multiple visual imagery layers; Bing, Mapbox, Esri and sometimes Esri Wayback. This way I've got multiple datapoints that show me different tides and different visual cues which I can compare to determine the most likely coastline.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1239661439 Take this bit of mangrove for example. Its dry on both Esri and Bing imagery, but has a different colour compared to the mangroves further landwards and on the Mapbox imagery its completely flooded. This tells me its below the MHWL. Even if I can't exactly pinpoint the MHWL, I get a decent enough indication.

My method is not without inaccuracies my any means, but the previous coastlines were drawn well below the accuracy that's obtainable with visual imagery. As long as the accuracy compared to the previous mapping increases I feel like its an acceptable mapping method. Perfect is the enemy of good and mapping is an iterative process after all. Given the lack of reliable coastline datasets its also the only method of mapping as far as I can tell. 

A lot of the coastlines I've improved used to look like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id&way=158852192#map=13/-20.3538/118.3517
or here, where I moved the coastline about 10km further seawards: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=145824909
olo81 (2019-03-06 16:10:58+00:00): Dlaczego usuwasz znaczniki ref? 
https://rj.metropoliaztm.pl/przystanki/katowice/
ZTM nie zmienił nazewnictwa przystanków!
assenizator5 (2018-10-17 13:47:32+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F#.D0.98.D0.BC.D1.8F_-_.D1.8D.D1.82.D0.BE_.D0.BD.D0.B0.D0.B7.D0.B2.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5_.D0.B8_.D1.82.D0.BE.D0.BB.D1.8C.D0.BA.D0.BE
Marc_ch (2018-10-11 17:18:44+00:00): Bonjour,
je ne saisis pas pourquoi vous avez créer un village pour Belmont-Broye alors que c'est une commune et qu'elle est déjà renseignée.
Par ailleurs quel est la source/date pour les maj des populations ?
je pensais que l'information par village n'était plus disponible depuis la fusion.
Salutations,
Marc
donovaly (2018-10-12 15:12:48+00:00): > je ne saisis pas pourquoi vous avez créer un village pour Belmont-Broye

My French is too bad, thus I reply in English (use Google translate):
Every municipality has to appear in the map. This is common for all printed maps I know. Take for example the german municipality "Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/240043543#map=14/50.5417/7.1236

It consists of former 3 villages. In all printed maps, as well as in all online maps, the new name of the merged villages is printed.

I stumbled over this issue for Swiss municipalities because I was recently invited to come to the Lucerne village "Escholzmatt-Marbach" but there was not such a village when I searched for it in OSM. In my printed route map I have as backup in my car, the village was printed.

-----------

For merges villages I put in the last known number if inhabitant because i see this is done everywhere in the Wikipedia, not only in Switzerland. Of course it will become outdated soon, so it could also be omitted.
Marc_ch (2018-10-12 18:46:08+00:00): Hello,

yes feel free to reply in English if you prefer.

adding missing village is fine but Belmont-Broye is not a village, it's a municipality.

every map style decide if it want to render village or municipality, we don't tag for the render, we don't create fake village only to force a "village-name-map" to show municipality name like a village.

the search work fine for a municipality https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Belmont-Broye

for population tag, the main issue is the licence of the source. wikipedia, because it allow to copy not-open data, is not a allowed source for an import into osm.
see no 2 in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users
and also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata#Importing_data_from_Wikidata_into_OSM
I 'll ask talk-ch for a valid source to update population tag with an allowed source.
it's why the source tag before uploading your changeset is so usefull, despite iD doesn't make its input intuitive.

Regards,
Marc
donovaly (2018-10-12 19:47:36+00:00): > Belmont-Broye is not a village, it's a municipality.

Yes, I talked about municipalities. As I wrote, you can grab any map of your choice and you will find there printed e.g the name of e.g. "Dessau-Rosslau". This is just a municipality without a center because it consists of 2 former towns.

As I see the official admin.ch statistics, Belmont-Broye is a normal subject like e.g. Murten. So I cannot see why OSM should
- not treat municipalities as villages or towns like all other maps around
- differentiate between subjects merged recently or in the past. I mean, take e.g. "Freital" (means "free valley") in Germany. This is the result of merges in the 1920s and nobody would come to the idea that this is just a municipality without a real grown center. Thus OSM also uses Freital as tag "town":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/240024401

> wikipedia, because it allow to copy not-open data, is not a allowed source for an import into OSM. 

Wikipedia takes the data automatically from admin.ch. These date are free to be published and that's why Wikipedia uses them. I cannot read out from your link that taking official admin.ch values grabbed by Wikipedia with free license cannot be used for OSM.
If this would be forbidden, then please write this down clearly for average users than me. I am a normal guy with cycling as hobby and I benefit from OSM and just ant to give something back. I am not a law expert and I don't think OSM can expect this.
Marc_ch (2018-10-12 20:49:02+00:00): Creating fake villages to see the name displayed on the map is NOT a good argument. Murten is listed as a city and as a municipality because the city and the municipality have the same name, it has nothing to do with the date of creation or merge.
Avenches for example is a merged municipality. The main village is also called Avenches, which is why Avenche is in osm as a city + municipality.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1425180889
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1868682
but each of the 2 objects describes something different, a village is not the same as a municipality.
As there is NO village called Belmont-Broye, there is no place=village in osm with the name Belmont-Broye.

for admin.ch/swisstopo invalid licence
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Switzerland/Datasources#Not-compatible_data_sources
I think you're perfectly aware of that, given the massive problem with street names before that, isn't it ?

Regards,
Marc
donovaly (2018-10-12 21:38:00+00:00): > Creating fake villages to see the name displayed on the map is NOT a good argument. Murten is listed as a city and as a municipality because the city and the municipality have the same name,

You don't understand me. Take these villages and towns:
"Clermont-Ferrand"
"Attnang-Puchheim "
"Dessau-Rosslau"

All are the result of a merge. The name did not exist in advance not do they had a historical center. Take any map of your choice and you will find them there as towns. So in 3 other countries in Europe municipalities appear on maps like villages and towns but not in Swiss OSM? And note that also Bing and Google do so for Swiss municipalities.
So why is there a different rule only for Swiss OSM? and where is this defined and who defined this?

> for admin.ch/swisstopo invalid licence 

You just claim this. But why does then Wikipedia, take these values automatically? Do you say, Wikipedia is violating the Swiss law? I cannot imagine that. And if you think so, please contact the Wikipedia guys because they have lawyers and can tell you why they are using the data and why this is legal.

> I think you're perfectly aware of that, given the massive problem with street names before that, isn't it ?

No and I am still pissed of how I was treated. Some OSM guys said I did something illegal. I organized a lawyer who said, he doesn't agree and that he thinks I did nothing illegally. I send some OSM admin my real name and offered help in clarification of the issue. And you know what? Nothing happened. I was not invited to a meeting to discuss it there, nobody wanted to hear what my lawyer said nor did anybody had an interest to start a lawsuit to get a final decision by a court and/or to get some attention from politicians to change the rules accordingly.
I was even blocked without a possibility to speak. That is like a trial where the accused person is not allowed to show off and speak how he sees the issue.
Marc_ch (2018-10-12 22:54:20+00:00): Clermont-Ferrand is a CITY (it doesn't care if it's a new or old one), you see "welcome to Clermont-Ferrand city" traffic sign when you go there, you see it on traffic sign destination it's why a place=city exist for Clermont-Ferrand.
it's also a municipality and it's why osm also have a 2nd objet for the municipality.
For Belmont-Broye, the traffic sign said : "Domdidier/Dompierre/Léchelles/Russy village (a part of Belmont-Broye municipality)". it's why osm have one place=village for each of the 4 villages but no place=village for Belmont-Broye.

that's not a special rule for Swiss, that a commun rule for osm : add objects for what they ARE and not for what YOU want to SEE rendered on the map. don't tag for the render, don't tag "to make a clone of Bing/Google/another map" !

Wikipedia : did you clic and read my previous link ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata#Importing_data_from_Wikidata_into_OSM
Wikipedia and osm rules are NOT the same.
I never said that wikipedia is wrong nor illegal, i said wikipedia/wikidata/osm rules for source are not the same.

Licence for SwissTopo : I would be very happy to see a court decision or a political decision to switch all Swisstopo datas to an open licence but today this is not true. you are free to sue Swisstopo if you want, you don't need anyone's agreement. but osm is not the right place to experiment with data import when the (c) does not allow it.
I didn't participate in the discussion about street names, but by reading your 11 comments on the changeset found in the block message, I think everyone have talked, the problem is that you don't seem to accept the osm rule about the valid  source. What is certain is that even if you don't agree, you can't ignore that copying Swisstopo data is a PROBLEM. you can't say it's not written or that you don't know ! I very unhappy that we can NOT copy data from Bing/Google/SwissTopo but deliberately breaking the rules is a waste of time for everyone since it will end up in a revert. there's a lot of useful things to do.

So please don't use Bing/Google/SwissTopo to create osm data and don't create place=village with the municipality when no village exist with this name.
Also don't import wikidata without looking at the source. wikidata is not a bypass to import not-allowed source for osm.
osm is not wikipedia. a source maybe be valid for widipedia/wikidata but not for osm. every survey I made is valid for osm but doesn't allow me to create a wikipedia for every objet I add in osm.

I hope you understand what I mean.

PS: for the population value, I've posted to talk-ch to check what is possible/allowed.

Regards,
Marc
donovaly (2018-10-15 12:13:04+00:00): Clermont-Ferrand is a CITY (it doesn't care if it's a new or old one),

As I wrote also according to Swiss law it doesn't matter if a merged municipality has a new name or an existing one and if it is a city or village. They all get a BFS number and in all maps I see so far (just checked the printed maps they sell at gas stations) they print merged municipalities as if they are normal villages. And so does also other online maps do. Moreover also for Germany and Austria OSM does so as well. So why should there be a special rule for the Swiss part of OSM?

> Wikipedia : did you clic and read my previous link?

Sure. And there is a red box with "Do not copy any information from Wikidata into OSM without checking its legal status"
I met the German Wiipedia guys once in Berlin and discussed with them. They are very accurate with the things the automatically import and their work cannot be compared to e.g. the English Wikipedia. The Germans won the vast majority of copyright lawsuits and they check everything as best as possible with their lawyers.
I am no lawyer and cannot discuss with you legal issues. But I encourage you to speak with the German/Swiss Wikipedia guys before you forbid yourself to use their data while its usage is most probably legal. If the Wikipedia guys state that their admin.ch import might be problematic for OSM, I accept that. If this is the case, please communicate this to the OSM users.
viloan (2018-10-07 11:32:17+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
VictorIE (2020-05-23 21:29:49+00:00): Hi, were nodes like this mean to be changed? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5963971155#map=19/54.39461/-5.89572
assenizator5 (2018-10-17 13:47:21+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F#.D0.98.D0.BC.D1.8F_-_.D1.8D.D1.82.D0.BE_.D0.BD.D0.B0.D0.B7.D0.B2.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5_.D0.B8_.D1.82.D0.BE.D0.BB.D1.8C.D0.BA.D0.BE
woodpeck (2018-10-09 22:24:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 63360720, 63359357, 63361699 where the changeset comment is: revert buggy automatic edit to traffic sign directions by yopaseopor - contrary to what is claimed, there is no consensus on the tagging list about this
Szymson (2018-10-09 17:54:09+00:00): Skąd taka zmiana? To jest zwykła droga gminna, a nie wojewódzka ani powiatowa. Komunikacja miejska tędy nie jeździ (ul. Derdowskiego), droga nie łączy żadnych miast ze sobą, a takie wymagania stawia dla drogi typu secondary wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:highway%3Dsecondary
szalona_entropia (2018-10-10 08:22:43+00:00): Nie będę się upierał, może być tertiary. Ale wtedy cały ciąg razem z DW101 i DW100 też powinien być tertiary.
maraf24 (2018-10-14 22:35:20+00:00): A co tu było powodem zmiany na secondary? Lotnisko czy droga wojewódzka?
szalona_entropia (2018-10-15 11:07:27+00:00): Ciągłość z DW100 (która była secondary), ale chyba faktycznie to w całości powinno być tertiary.
Chociaż można to potraktować jako dojazd do miejscowości turystycznych nad morzem i wtedy mogłoby być secondary.
Szymson (2018-10-15 11:57:53+00:00): Owszem, jest to dojazd do Rewy i Mechelinek, mocno oblegany w sezonie letnim

Ponadto dochodzi ruch z "drogi przez łąki" czyli DP 1514G przy magazynach gazowych i bazie paliw. Od Pucka do DW 100 szczególnie w czasie wakacji jest to popularna alternatywa na dojazd Puck-Gdynia (Estakada) - S6 wśród tubylców wobec wiecznie zakorkowanej DW 216.

P. S. Pytanie niezwiązane z tematem, czy ktoś wie może jakie jest opóźnienie w moderowaniu na forum? Dotarłem tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=22306&p=74 i chciałem się podzielić swoimi propozycjami, dodałem jeden post ale od 15h nic się nie pojawiło.
assenizator5 (2018-10-17 13:47:10+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F#.D0.98.D0.BC.D1.8F_-_.D1.8D.D1.82.D0.BE_.D0.BD.D0.B0.D0.B7.D0.B2.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5_.D0.B8_.D1.82.D0.BE.D0.BB.D1.8C.D0.BA.D0.BE
trigpoint (2018-10-07 15:29:57+00:00): This is vandalism, am reverting this.
pangoSE (2018-10-07 22:12:17+00:00): Bra jobbat! Välkommen till OSM.
Visst är det kul?
Mvh
Egil
PS: Gå gärna med i en Telegram-chat, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_centric_Telegram_accounts
Finns även en specifikt för SE.
kreuzschnabel (2018-10-08 08:05:54+00:00): Hallo pfwald, diese Änderung (und andere) wird aktuell im Forum unter https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64009 diskutiert. Du bist herzlich dazu eingeladen, dich an der Diskussion zu beteiligen. In der Löschung einzelner Wegrelationen zugunsten einer Sammelrelation wird dort allgemein wenig Sinn gesehen.
maraf24 (2018-10-14 19:27:30+00:00): Jedna jezdnia - jedna linia.
maraf24 (2018-10-14 19:28:38+00:00): Już to kiedyś poprawiałem. Przestań mapować pasy na jezdni.
Szymson (2018-10-14 19:35:11+00:00): Zgodnie z tym artykułem: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Proposed_features/Street_area oraz rysunkami: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Proposed_features/Street_area i https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:StreetsasfacesconnectionModified.jpg powierznie wyłączone z ruchu są już powodem do rysowania oddzielnych jezdni
Szymson (2018-10-14 19:35:56+00:00): Edit: to link do pierwszej grafiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:MarekStreetsasfacesWithPointsLegend2.jpg
maraf24 (2018-10-14 20:15:12+00:00): O rany (bez urazy).
1. To jest proposal. Każdy sobie może coś zaproponować i wrzucić na wiki do sekcji proposed_features.
2. Ten proposal jest mi dobrze znany i na pewno nie miał i nie może proponować rysowania osobnych linii przy wyłaczonym przez zakreskowanie obszarze, gdyż jest to pogwałcenie od dawna obowiązującej i jednak z fundamentalnych zasad rysowania dróg w OSM na całym świecie.
Autor proposala faktycznie mógł mieć takie pomysły - wcześniej w tym proposalu proponował rysowanie każdego kierunku jezdni osobnymi liniami, ale to chyba po roku w końcu usunął.
Przejrzę ten proposal ponownie, bo może coś tam jest niejasno albo ktoś coś dopisał.
maraf24 (2018-10-14 20:20:36+00:00): Dokładniej, to ten proposal jest o tagach area:highway do rysowania obszaru dróg. Nie jest on o stosowaniu tagu highway.
Jeśli chcesz rysować area:highway, to możesz go stosować, mimo że to proposal.
Nie powinno to działać w drugą stronę, nie powinno dochodzić do modyfikacji istniejących obiektów tylko z powodu chęci stosowania proposala.
Szymson (2018-10-14 20:21:52+00:00): Rozumiem, wcześniej właśnie tak robiłem, że każdy pas do skrętu mapowałem jako oddzielna jezdnia, co zostało źle odebrane przez innym mapujących, również Yanosik głupiał przy takich rozwiązaniach. Z kolei uwzględnianie powierzchni wyłączonych z ruchu i oddzielne jezdnie pod odpowiednio ostrym kątem były przez tą aplikację dobrze postrzegane (np. te secondary link przy DK 6 i Zamostnej na wschód od tego skrzyżowania
maraf24 (2018-10-14 20:27:12+00:00): Jeszcze skomentuję grafiki:
* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:MarekStreetsasfacesWithPointsLegend2.jpg
Zauważ, że tu są fizyczne podziały - trawa lub wysepka (traffic_island)
* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:StreetsasfacesconnectionModified.jpg
Tutaj część linii błędnie narysowana - na pewno wszystkie te, gdzie nie ma między nimi fizycznej bariery.  Takich rozrysowań nie widziałem już od paru lat, ale kiedyś się zdarzały, i to dość często. No ale to rysunek z 2015, a sam autor jest mi znany z takiego (przestarzałego) mapowania. Zapewne wynika to z faktu, że ma on bardzo długi staż w OSM.
maraf24 (2018-10-14 20:31:40+00:00): >Z kolei uwzględnianie powierzchni wyłączonych z ruchu i oddzielne jezdnie pod odpowiednio ostrym kątem były przez tą aplikację dobrze postrzegane

Aplikacja powinna działać z dowolną kombinacją poprawnie otagowanych linii, nawet jeśli nie odpowiadają one rzeczywistości. Przypuszczam więc, że mógł być gdzieś ukryty błąd w danych OSM.
Moim też zdaniem, przy bardzo dużych wyłączonych powierzchniach lepiej jest nagiąć reguły i wyrysować dodatkową linię.
abrensch (2018-10-16 20:44:04+00:00): Hallo wendenmicha, hier hast Du ein barrier=gate auf die L14 gesetzt, das sollte doch bestimmt (nur) auf die Alte Burgstrasse?

Gruss, Arndt
wendenmicha (2018-10-17 08:04:10+00:00): hallo Arndt , 
oh, ja stimmt !
geht die "alte Burgstrasse" von Freyenstein nach Niemerlang, zur Kreuzung auf die "K6826" ?
Diesen weg bin ich in der Maisernte im Sept.oeffters gefahren. Deshalb nachgezeichnet, ergaenzt.
Gruss, Michael
PlaneMad (2018-10-07 18:52:49+00:00): Hi Prabesh, amazing work with the map at Butwal. I had noticed lots of unconnected nodes that i removed using the JOSM validator, there still a lot of work to do to connect roads all along Mahendra highway. Hope you can look into it :)
literan (2018-10-07 15:56:57+00:00): какая нафиг аллея? будешь вандалить и прверащать здания в парки - получишь блок, покемонщик
literan (2018-10-08 10:51:00+00:00): почему вдруг она пустая, если на ней стоит тег entrance=service? восстановил.
KitonZenobia (2018-10-07 14:29:52+00:00): This changeset should have been reverted 12 months ago, now it has become a little difficult.
I'm very sorry for all the empty ways I've introduced!
Negjana (2018-10-10 14:03:29+00:00): Thanks for messing up all the changes I did......
Nakaner (2018-10-10 15:44:13+00:00): Hi KitonZenobia,

I have received a complaint about this changeset and thinking about a revert of this changeset.

You claim to revert a changeset (a mechanical edit by rmikke) by this changeset. However, this changeset looks strange and contains modifications which are unusal for reverts.

1. Why did you delete railway:etcs=1 from https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/245412306?

2. Why did you change the operator=* tag of https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/53848279?

3. Why did you change the usage=* tag of https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/52504682?

4. Why did you delete railway:pzb=yes of https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/121410188?

5. Why did you add operator="ÖBB Infrastruktur AG", railway:track_type=main and the wikidata ID of the Ostbahn to a waterway=stream in Upper Austria? https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/89465632

6. Why did you change the wikidata=* tag value of many railway tracks all over Austria from Q5873973 (initially added to this way by rmmike) to the Q680692 (the value of the Ostbahn)? Example: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63279770/

These are just a few examples.

Please answer all these questions as soon as possible, you have damaged the map data a lot (but not really visible on most maps). You can respond by visiting https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/63279770, logging in with your OSM account and then posting a comment. You cannot answer via email.

PLEASE DO NOT REVERT THIS CHANGESET! More experienced contributors will do it. They know how to do it and what they do!

Best regards

Michael
KitonZenobia (2018-10-16 19:15:52+00:00): Ich übernehme nicht die Verantwortung für die Zerstörungen, die beim Reverten eines mechanischen Edits (unüberlegtes & tw. fehlerhaftes Eintragen von Wikidata-Tags) des ortsfremden Users rmikke entstanden sind.