[Tagging] Route maintenance tagging

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Jul 19 19:57:20 UTC 2018

Just saw https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Asurvey%3Adate
Since survey:date is a documented tag, I will start using it to record
route survey dates.
Not on ways, but on sizeable hiking route relations.
See if I can get fellow mappers and walking route operators to join the

2018-07-19 18:39 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com>:

> Thanks for the warning. Of course it is not the idea to delete anything
> except when proven wrong.
> I meant: information from outside sources, such as gpx-trackings, which
> are older then the last completed survey, should not be entered into OSM.
> Also remember that I'm talking about route information, not mapped
> physical objects. We're not mapping individual waymarks, but routes
> indicated by waymarks. Even if you remove the route relation, nothing
> physical is taken from the map.
> The survey date is the key data element here, if any kind of systematic
> maintenance to the route relations is setup. Will it take? I don't know.
> We'll see. The check&maintenance system for cycle node network and walking
> node networks (vmarc.be) works like a charm, so I have good hope)
> 2018-07-19 17:02 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com>:
>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:22 AM Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > The goal of the idea is to tag the date of the last reality check. The
>> best thing I have now is the date of the last edit, which most of the time
>> results from e.g. a mapper's action (cut or remove) on a way that's part of
>> the route relation.
>> >
>> > I want to ensure that the route in the field and the route relation
>> stay in sync, and when they don't (which is a 100% certainty) that you can
>> tell at what point in time it did match.
>> >
>> > Information older than that date (e.g. gpx-tracks) can be discarded,
>> newer information can be entered, and edits after the survey date are new
>> info which should be kept.
>> Keeping the field survey up to date is a laudable goal, and I've no
>> objection to some sort of tagging that reports "this geometry was
>> field surveyed on <date>." Making it fit with the data model will be
>> challenging; it's not something that can be easily automated, given
>> the variety of mappers' workflows.In the current world, to make
>> something like this a reality you have to have an individual or
>> organization that becomes the de facto 'owner' of the route and keeps
>> track of its own surveys - and that isn't very OSMish. I think this
>> could be worked around with sufficient cleverness.
>> But please, please, don't discard data older than a certain date. OSM
>> is a very young project as geography goes. While out-of-date data can
>> be misleading, the right thing to do is to inform, not to delete,
>> particularly in cases where the out-of-date information is the only
>> information that is available. It may also be the only information
>> that can guide in recovering from an act of vandalism or a
>> badly-considered import.
>> Perhaps I'm coming at this from the 'wrong' perspective. since a fair
>> amount of my mapping is of features that nobody has yet seen fit to
>> map at all, or that were once imported from external data that I
>> consider hallucinatory. If someone with a GPS found a route passable a
>> decade ago, that's a piece of information that I now have that I
>> wouldn't have had otherwise. It could be that the route is no longer
>> passable, has been relocated, or has been demolished, but without the
>> old data, what reason do I have even to go and find out?
>> Moreover, the land remembers. I've been on trips where abandoned
>> tracks and the grades of dismantled railroads, a century old and now
>> grown to trees, have been important landmarks. I have no qualms about
>> not showing them on a general-purpose map, but to an off-trail hiker,
>> they are waymarks for eyes to see that can.
>> The right thing to do with 'stale' data - perhaps even 'proven
>> incorrect' data - is to inform, not to discard.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> --
> Vr gr Peter Elderson

Vr gr Peter Elderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180719/8bc12df0/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list