[OSM-newbies] Starting with JOSM and OpenStreetMap in general

[Rick Collins]

At 08:50 AM 10/10/2007, you wrote:
>Rick Collins wrote:
>
> > At 04:35 AM 10/10/2007, you wrote:
> >> Rick Collins wrote:
> >>
> >> >> We tend to think of GPS logs as being primary survey evidence, editing
> >> >> them beyond simply removing points breaks that assumption.
> >> >
> >> > I don't know who you are, but you sound as if you are speaking for
> >> > the project.  If what you are saying is true, then you are asking
> >> > that inaccurate data be entered rather than comparing it to maps to
> >> > clean it up.
> >>
> >> No, he's saying that currently, all GPS logs stored on OSM servers are
> >> definitely free of any rights problems. If you upload GPS logs which you
> >> have not personally collected with a unit, that becomes no longer
> >> necessarily true.
> >
> > He said that points from the raw data are only culled (removed) and
> > none are edited (moved).  I can't imagine that a GPS track of any
> > reasonable size would not have points which need to be cleaned
> > up.  If you don't, you will have inaccurate data.
>
>Oh, for goodness' sake.
>
>The OSM modus operandi is:
>
>1. Survey, taking notes and using GPS to record tracklog
>2. Upload tracklog to server (partly as evidence of passage)
>3. Use tracklog and notes to help you draw the road ("way")
>4. Repeat in true wiki style until accurate result achieved
>
>In the great majority of cases we do not automatically convert from
>tracklogs to ways. There is therefore no reason to remove or move
>points within a GPS tracklog. If a GPS trackpoint is visibly out of
>place, as happens, you simply don't trace your way over it.
>
>Either you are deliberately misunderstanding what people are saying,
>or you have made absolutely no effort to understand what happens
>before shooting your mouth off. (Just as, it seems, you did by
>unilaterally starting a Yahoo group without even bothering to Google
>for "openstreetmap forum".) Neither is a particularly good way to
>engage in debate.

<sarcasm mode on>
Yes, my apologies, I am a total moron.  I should have known that the 
laws of physics don't apply to data collected for OSM and that all I 
have to do is look at my data to see that it is perfectly accurate.
<sarcasm mode off>

My sarcasm does not help communication.  However, your inflammatory 
comments are clearly not aimed at communication either.  I do 
understand what is being suggested for editing data.  However, I have 
enough experience to know that GPS data frequently has significant 
errors.  Of course, if being 30 or more meters off of a road is 
acceptable to this effort, then my complaints do not apply.  My point 
is that we *already* have access to free, unencumbered data that is 
typically accurate to this degree.

Yes, I am aware that most GPS data collected is much better than 30 
meters accurate.  But the point is that it is not uncommon for the 
data to wander off in ways that can't be detected just by looking the 
data.  To suggest that this only happens for a single point at a time 
is not accurate.

As to the Yahoo group, how does that create any problems?  Some 
people are more comfortable with that forum and it can get the 
attention of people who otherwise would not have found out about 
OSM.  Why are you concerned about that?


> > Heck, I already have access to inaccurate data, Tiger, the maps that
> > came with my GPS, etc.  Yet another database of poor data helps no one.
>
>Your confrontational attitude is increasingly tiresome. It is also
>inappropriate for the newbies list, which is here to help people with
>practical questions about OSM mapping, not to argue about whether OSM
>processes could be improved.

I am sorry if you feel I am confrontational.  I think I come across 
this way because after repeated postings of facts that support my 
views, people ignore the facts and post opinions and conjectures that 
are not relevant.  I am merely trying to repeat the facts so as to 
emphasize them.  I would hope that you could understand that email is 
a limited medium and not assume that I am trying to be 
"confrontational" when there is no tone or body language to indicate 
that.  I am a very logical, factual person and this is often 
misunderstood in emails.

A perfect example is your post above...

>If a GPS trackpoint is visibly out of
>place, as happens, you simply don't trace your way over it.

This totally ignores the fact that there can be significant 
deviations in the data that do not occur as "single points".  Yet, no 
one has addressed this problem in their replies to my 
posts.  However, one person did point me to the way to convert a GPX 
data set to and OSM data set.  That was a very useful post.  I tested 
it and uploaded a short section of a track as OSM data, however I 
have not see it appear in the data on the site and I don't see a way 
to determine the status of my uploads.


>If you have serious questions about the direction of the project they
>are better placed on the talk or dev list. Alternatively, as you seem
>so disdainful of everything that OSM has done, perhaps you might like
>to start your own project to show us what we're doing wrong.

Like your initial paragraphs, this seems to have a tone that is 
uncalled for.  I am posting facts and looking for answers.  As I 
said, most of the replies have been lacking in substance.  If you 
don't want to discuss this with me, you would do better to not reply 
at all.  Being rude is not a reasonable way to proceed.