[Rebuild] Update on progress

[Michael Collinson]

Hi Alan,

We have always understood that there will be local issues and have 
worked hard to resolve them. The Western USA looks very good [1] but not 
the greater LA area [2]. Clicking around this seems to exclusively due 
to one undecided contributor blars [3]. This seems the sole issue. So, 
can we help? You appear to know the person and the objection. May I ask 
you to share that on or off-line?  Despite messages sent, he/she has not 
contacted us at all to my knowledge. Never too late.

Mike
LWG

[1] Western USA:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfe&lon=-116.28223&lat=41.20676&zoom=5&opacity=0.99&overlays=overview,wtfe_point_clean,wtfe_line_clean,wtfe_point_harmless,wtfe_line_harmless,wtfe_point_inrelation,wtfe_line_inrelation_cp,wtfe_line_inrelation,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created

[2] LA area:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfe&lon=-118.11969&lat=33.91054&zoom=10&opacity=0.83&overlays=overview,wtfe_point_clean,wtfe_line_clean,wtfe_point_harmless,wtfe_line_harmless,wtfe_point_inrelation,wtfe_line_inrelation_cp,wtfe_line_inrelation,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created

[3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/blars

On 19/04/2012 11:13, Alan Mintz wrote:
> At 2012-04-18 09:36, Richard Weait wrote:
>> If you
>> have specific, real world data example that you think will make
>> interesting test cases, please present them on the rebuild list.
>
> I don't know about interesting, but this chunk of the Los Angeles-area 
> city of Glendale has plenty of potential data loss: minlat='34.1' 
> minlon='-118.3' maxlat='34.2' maxlon='-118.2'
>
> According to JOSM and the licensing plugin:
>
> <pre>
>                         Ways            Nodes
> Total objects           3912            35909
> Data Loss               1013 (26%)      4734 (13%)
> Possible Data Loss      582 (15%)       2133 (6%)
> </pre>
>
> Here's a pic of part of this area in JOSM now: 
> https://sites.google.com/site/am909geo/osm-1/GlendalePre.jpg?attredirects=0 
>
> and here's a pic after deleting the ways and nodes in the "Data Loss" 
> category of the license change plugin: 
> https://sites.google.com/site/am909geo/osm-1/GlendalePost.jpg?attredirects=0 
>
>
> I think I speak for all locals when I say this is an unacceptable 
> amount of loss. If you look at the Geofabrik maps, you will see that 
> this is basically what's going to happen to the whole Los Angeles 
> area. Is that really acceptable - to have a fairly important city of 
> the world become completely unusable in the map? A large part of it 
> (is there a tool to see how much?) is because of the inability of the 
> LWG (or whoever) to find a way for the contributions of a single 
> mapper (you know who it is, or can easily see) to be licensable. As I 
> understand it, his objection is not unreasonable, and I can see ways 
> in which a mutually acceptable solution could be found, too (as it was 
> for balrog-kun and DaveHansen TIGER).
>
>
>> Once the tests are passing on the expanded test data, the schedule
>> will return to the previously announced phases; Limited bounding box
>> tests, larger test areas, then the rest of the planet.  Those phases
>> will be announced with as much notice as possible, consistent with
>> progressing with limited delay.  You can appreciate that both of those
>> are desirable while also being in tension with each other.
>
> Sure, except that most of us do not understand the weight that 
> "limited delay" has been given in this. I can certainly understand 
> that those who are working tirelessly on the redaction project want to 
> see it done with so they can get on with their lives, but at the same 
> time, is it OK to (likely for an indefinite period of time*) damage 
> large, important** swaths of the map by just charging ahead when we 
> haven't had sufficient time to prevent it?
>
> The 3 days or so notice that was originally given for the server 
> migration (and the difference between what "read-only" ended up 
> meaning and what most inferred) was not enough when we thought that 
> the redaction would proceed immediately afterwards. I would encourage 
> notice of at least one week, and then subject to finding a reasonable 
> solution to the data loss problem.
>
>
>> We'll update rebuild weekly, until completion, even if only to say
>> "still working on the tests".
>
> Please and thank you!
>
>
>> Watch the rebuild list or #osm IRC channel.[2]
>
> I would encourage you to send it to the other lists (at least talk) as 
> well. IRC is not a reasonable signal/noise ratio for most of us.
>
>
> Notes:
> * As mentioned, we've already lost at least one huge contributor. If 
> the map will be as damaged as I think, I am as likely as not to go 
> away, too, as the project has not fulfilled its obligation to be a 
> reasonable steward of my (substantial) work. As much as some think 
> there will be these huge crowds of people wanting to map, this simply 
> has not turned out to be the case. I believe the map cannot be 
> anywhere near usable without large contributors, and we "don't grow on 
> trees". All we ask is respect for our time - something which has not 
> been given us, regardless of intent.
>
> ** I don't mean to imply that any part of the world is more important 
> to humanity than any other part - simply that the number of people 
> likely to want to use a map of Los Angeles is larger than the number 
> wanting to use a map of smaller and/or less populous places. This is 
> important to gaining any sort of widespread support. I also see that 
> much of Europe is in danger as well, and this is perhaps even more 
> important socially for areas that are not well-mapped by other sources.
>
> -- 
> Alan Mintz <Alan_Mintz+OSM at Earthlink.net>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rebuild mailing list
> Rebuild at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/rebuild