<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hello Andrew, hello everyone else.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I've not done a "big revert" yet; I've concentrated on trying to
work out how to do that without adversely affecting everyone
else's work, and as I'm sure you've guessed, it's been more of a
background job rather than originally intended. Despite warning
of a "potential hole appearing in the data in West London in a few
days time" back in April last year, I now hope that I'll be able
to restrict changes to problem keys only, and only deal with
problem imagery where specific problems have been reported, like
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144667839">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144667839</a> in the example below
(note that <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/996697879">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/996697879</a> in the same
changeset matches the claimed Bing imagery).</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Best Regards,</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Andy<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 29/01/2023 18:01, Andrew Hain wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:AM8P250MB0012182D3CC9B58F2B8C492DE6D29@AM8P250MB0012.EURP250.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255,
255, 255);" class="elementToProof">
Is the mapping in West London now in a state where mappers can
build on it without risking their edits getting lost?</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255,
255, 255);" class="elementToProof">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255,
255, 255);" class="elementToProof">
--</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255,
255, 255);" class="elementToProof">
Andrew<br>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt"
face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Andy
Townsend <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com"><ajt1047@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 18 April 2022 12:44<br>
<b>To:</b> Talk Gb <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org"><talk-gb@openstreetmap.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Talk-GB] Potentially incompatible edits in
West London</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span
style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Hello - especially to mappers in
London. Andy from OSM's Data Working
<br>
Group here.<br>
<br>
There's been a suggestion that mapper that has been very
active in West <br>
London* <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412</a>
has been using
<br>
various sources that aren't compatible with OSM. Attempts
to contact the <br>
mapper via <br>
<a
href="http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2055614"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2055614</a>
have
<br>
mostly been unsuccessful, although a local mapper has
managed to get <br>
replies to some private messages (which unfortunately do
also suggest <br>
that they're using incompatible sources). It has been
suggested that <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mik1412"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mik1412</a>
is another account by the
<br>
same person.<br>
<br>
Attempts by the DWG to get the mapper to interact with the
community <br>
have failed: <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412/blocks"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412/blocks</a>
,
<br>
hence a "block until they engage with us" message at <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919</a>
.<br>
<br>
I had hoped that we'd be able to revert and redact certain
classes of <br>
data only (see e.g. comment on <br>
<a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113072980"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113072980</a>
). However, the
<br>
problematic changes include geometric changes too - it has
been said <br>
that the latest change to <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144667839"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144667839</a>
<br>
(see the top-right corner of <br>
<a
href="https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=113007152"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=113007152</a>
) isn't possible
<br>
based on imagery available to OSM because of tree cover.
That edit is <br>
unlikely to be based on survey as the mapper concerned
apparently hasn't <br>
been in London since late 2019 (due to the pandemic
etc.). Some other <br>
changes seem to match Google Street View and not a more
recent survey.<br>
<br>
It therefore looks like we'll have to revert (and likely
redact) most or <br>
all of this mapper's changes since the beginning of 2020,
unless we get <br>
a reason not to from a reply to <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919</a>
. I'm sending this
<br>
message for a few reasons:<br>
<br>
* to encourage mappers in West London to comment on this
user's <br>
changesets, both where the data appears not to be based on
sources <br>
available to OSM but also where it can be validated by
e.g. survey. I <br>
don't expect that you'll get a reply, but those comments
will be <br>
extremely useful to us and to everyone else in the area.<br>
<br>
* to give everyone a chance to tell me if I've got
anything wrong <br>
(please reply on this list if that's the case).<br>
<br>
* to give everyone a bit of a warning of a potential
"hole" appearing in <br>
the data in West London in a few days time.<br>
<br>
I won't start any wide-scale revert for a week or so to
give the mapper <br>
concerned yet another chance to reply. I have already
reverted (and <br>
redacted) some changes in <br>
<a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115296538"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115296538</a>
where there were
<br>
specific reports about individual pieces of data.<br>
<br>
Best Regards,<br>
<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
* more recently the same mapper has been active in France
- I've also <br>
asked them for the sources of their edits there.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>