<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p><br>
</p>
<p>One thought I've had for a long time (and have probably mentioned in the past) is a walkers' editor (app rather than web-based). To be used something like:</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>User goes for walk and records GPX trace, following this sort of pattern.</p>
<p><br>
Each time the type of right of way changes, the user selects a high level type ("Public Footpath", "Public Bridleway" etc in the UK) together with optional surface tags.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>User can also enter relevant POIs like stiles, gates etc when they are encountered.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>When user returns home, track simplification algorithm used to make a way from the GPX trace and tags it with the tags equivalent to the ROW type.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>User downloads data from OSM and algorithms are used to auto-join the user's new ways to existing ways where appropriate (or alternatively, the user does this manually)</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Would there be any interest in this I wonder? </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Nick</p>
<br>
<br>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Gregory <nomoregrapes@googlemail.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 25 February 2016 15:37<br>
<b>To:</b> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Talk-GB] New users and P2</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">Probably a side-effect of being more recently created, but I've got the impression iD is easier to make coded adjustments to & specialised implementations of (certainly these exist).<br>
<br>
That's just another small sales point for iD. But also provides the argument: if you can't get improvements added, fork it and add them yourself (could apply to Potlatch too).
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Anyway, I use JOSM mainly. I agree with Jerry(SK53) in that we should be supporting multiple editors and even specialised ones (for data-types or entry-device).<br>
</div>
<div><br>
>From "Durham Ridge",<br>
Gregory.</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 25 February 2016 at 15:13, SK53 <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sk53.osm@gmail.com" target="_blank">sk53.osm@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Apart from other factors a very strong reason for favouring iD over P2 is that the latter is Flash-based, It therefore has a degree of in-built obsolescence, and may not be allowed for security reasons in some organisations.
<br>
<br>
</div>
iD has been the default editor for a number of years now (just under 3 IIRC), and the bulk of additional code for on-line editors is added to iD, mainly by MapBox. There have been enhancements to P2 too, but these are many fewer. So the latter is neither obsolete,
nor in an end-of-life stage. However, when it's end comes it's likely to be swift as flash gets eliminated by major browsers.<br>
<br>
</div>
There's still plenty of space for on-line editors (for instance one which deals with highways, buildings etc as primitive objects rather than OSM elements as the current ones do): but whether anyone is willing to take on the odium of maintaining an OSM editor
is moot.<br>
<br>
</div>
Furthermore, editors on mobile devices are much less mature, and there are substantial potential benefits in reducing or even eliminating the survey-edit-update cycle.
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
Jerry<br>
</div>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 25 February 2016 at 13:15, Dave F <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:davefoxfac63@btinternet.com" target="_blank">davefoxfac63@btinternet.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
What's wrong with with suggesting users use P2 over iD?<br>
<br>
P2 has a few advantages over other editors. The only real benefit I've noticed in iD is it prevents loading of data if user is zoomed too far out. Something that Richard Fairhurst might be able to implement fairly easily into P2.<br>
<br>
I'm even less encouraged to use iD after a couple of conversations with two of the developers (the only two?). They appear resentful to many of the suggestions for improvement.<br>
<br>
>From memory Richard F. was a developer in the start up of iD, Is he still involved?<br>
<br>
Dave F.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 25/02/2016 09:30, Philip Barnes wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<br>
On Thu Feb 25 06:43:23 2016 GMT, Andy Robinson wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
I noticed that too Rob. Day before yesterday they all seemed to start at the same time so I assumed it was uni students.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
We spotted them as new users from the bot that reports in #osm-gb.<br>
<br>
They were spread over the country, I assume the lecturer hasn't updated his notes, the default if you hit the edit button as a new user is iD.<br>
<br>
Phil (trigpoint)<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
From: Rob Nickerson [mailto:<a href="mailto:rob.j.nickerson@gmail.com" target="_blank">rob.j.nickerson@gmail.com</a>]<br>
Sent: 25 February 2016 00:24<br>
To: Talk-GB<br>
Subject: [Talk-GB] New users and P2<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
Is anyone aware of any recent OSM press - we've seen a lot of new OSM mappers in the Midlands in the last 2 days :-)<br>
<br>
Also is Potlatch 2 still the default for new mappers as they all seem to be using that? I though we'd switched to iD as the default across all browsers now (although I don't remember where I read that!).<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Rob<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
---<br>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature">Gregory<br>
<a href="mailto:osm@livingwithdragons.com" target="_blank">osm@livingwithdragons.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.livingwithdragons.com" target="_blank">http://www.livingwithdragons.com</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>