[Imports] Slovenia landcover import RABA-KGZ review
stefan.baebler at gmail.com
Fri Jun 19 09:43:40 UTC 2015
First of all, sorry for the delay in handling this issue.
We stopped the import immediately as the issue was raised, and disabled the
import feature on our import tool (http://raba.openstreetmap.si )
Thank you for paying close attention to the activity in the OSM DB.
Initially we wanted to import the forest (generally "most prominent")
features only. Some features were forest-like, in some areas other features
were more prominent (vineyards, hop fields, rocks...), so we agreed to
broaden the set of imported areas.
We were discussing about whether to include farmland and meadows, and even
made a survey in an attempt to gather more opinions to get to consensus and
invited whole local community to participate (
In preparation for the survey we prepared the wiki page.
The result were in favor of broader selection
sample size is small (n=7, one user from the core import initiative
admitted accidentally answering it twice in favor of forests only)
Both (farmland and meadows)457%Farmland (only, no meadows)00%Meadows (only,
no farmland)229%Neither (no farmland, no meadows)114%
85% of the survey participants were 6 of us, the core group of the import
initiative, so we took it as a signal to make a broader import, and agreed
on whatever features can be cleanly mapped to existing OSM tagging scheme
and is accurately mapped in the forestry-and-farmland-specific source (from
ministry of agriculture)
As we came to the decision we were excited to prepare the data and to start
importing, We needed your approval, but forgot to adjust the documentation
with our latest decision.
It is not a technical mistake in the import process, nor a malicious way to
"smuggle" data past the review process.
It is an honest documentation mistake, that unfortunately wasted your,
A co-importer just fixed the import wiki page (
and we're double checking every landuse type tags to make sure the wiki is
After wiki page is fixed, we'll let you know and ask for another review.
Of course we will fix the already imported data, if needed.
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> On 06/16/2015 07:58 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > I have commented on
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/31644282 and
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/31935851, both of which I picked
> > at random because they had raba:id=5000 objects in them, and requested
> > that the matter be resolved before the import continues.
> It appears that the importers are working to a different specifiaction
> than that which they had sought review on:
> I think that this invalidates the review and might require the reversion
> of part or all of the import.
> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> Imports mailing list
> Imports at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Imports