[talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 46
Anthony Panozzo
panozz at outlook.com
Sat Apr 30 04:20:00 UTC 2022
Let me put it this way, it very easy for you to come along with your validator toll and get on your high horse and point out how trash some routing edits are... but you have no clue at all how much effort it take to get some intersections functioning as intended as per the rule of the intersection, the one you pointed out was pretty simple and was functioning 100% correctly before you touched it now it allows u-turns, you’re pointing out the tiny issue that your validator points out but what you don’t realize is that the validator doe not see the big picture either, its pretty much just pointing out conflicting restrictions which are even sometimes left in intentionally, this is not the first time ive ran into your edits but I have had enough of it, it takes a lot more knowledge and effort to get them working as intended per the rules than for you to come along with your little tool, if you personally don’t know the intended routing and can’t see any errors using the routing engine itself LEAVE IT ALONE, OSM is only meant to be edited by people with local knowledge of the areas, I put a lot of time into what I do including random routing on my gps to see what it will throw at me, I do not need to be worry about you and your tool coming along to destroy it. I am not proff reading this so sorry if there are spelling errors!
From: talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 1:33 PM
To: talk-au at openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 46
Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
talk-au at openstreetmap.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
talk-au-owner at openstreetmap.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Talk-au digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178,
Issue 44) (Andrew Davidson)
2. Re: iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol
178, Issue 44) (Andrew Davidson)
3. Re: iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol
178, Issue 44) (Phil Wyatt)
4. FW: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44 (Phil Wyatt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 11:53:53 +1000
From: Andrew Davidson <theswavu at gmail.com>
To: talk-au at openstreetmap.org
Subject: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest,
Vol 178, Issue 44)
Message-ID: <9d7c85e4-257e-f7b0-bd48-bf425c9c30ff at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
On 30/4/22 00:45, Anthony Panozzo wrote:
> This account is either a bot account or someone that thinks they know
> more than they actually do, every single time anybody does a routing
> correction this account comes along and ?fixes? it based on ?knowledge?
Some terminology before we start. To be valid a turn restriction
relation needs to have:
1. A way with the role "from"
2. A way with the role "to"
3. One or more "via" s that can be either a node or one or more ways
4. The members must connect in a way that you can travel
When I say "broken" I mean that one of the rules is broken and when I
say "knowledge" I mean I know what a valid turn restriction should be.
> from the notes, let me just say I looked over some of the edit this
> account does and it breaks the routing for the most part, Changeset:
> 120344373 | OpenStreetMap
This changeset deleted this turn restriction:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13905961
which you added in changeset 118257827 and then broke in 118293106 (it
only had a node via member). When I reviewed this one I decided to
delete it because it would only duplicate this turn restriction:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/14044389
which you added in changeset 119769921, if I fixed it.
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120344373> and Changeset:
> 120198383 | OpenStreetMap
This intersection had 15 broken turn restriction relation in it:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477255
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477256
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477257
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477258
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477260
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477261
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477263
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477268
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477269
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13557714
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761157
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761161
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761169
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761170
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13991446
You broke 14 and added one new broken relation (13991446). While I was
deleting these I noticed that the intersection had some sort of
cross-your-heart thing going on with added ways for turn lanes, so I
simplified it to a standard traffic light box intersection:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-34.76387/138.59277
You can turn right from each arm which means we don't have to have any
no-right turns. There are 4 no-left turns because each approach has a
slip lane. Since it's SA and at traffic lights then there are four no
u-turns to cover that. This is exactly the same routing information that
was there before, but now in a simpler easier to maintain format.
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120198383#map=17/-34.76452/138.59301>
> are two examples of this account breaking routing, ive been wasting my
> time spending hours and hours fixing routing just for this shitty bot to
> come along and fuck it all up over and over again, I would like to ask
> DWG to take a real close look at this account and see if it can be
> banned from any further edits under the bot edit policy or straight out
> vandalism!
I am not a bot. Just a mapper with overpass, the JOSM validator, the
to-do plugin, and many hours of puzzling over the question of what a
broken turn restriction relation was supposed to be doing.
A couple of years ago I spent quite a bit of time fixing all the turn
restrictions around AU, but I have to keep coming back every couple of
months, as 100-200 newly broken ones get created every month. Mostly
because iD will quietly break existing turn restrictions or let you
create invalid ones and then upload them to OSM. I used to put changeset
comments on the ones that had broken them until a user asked me how they
could stop doing it and I discovered that there isn't a way to do that
in iD.
My fixes should not be changing any routing outcomes as they are almost
all deleting turn restrictions that iD didn't clean up after a mapper
reconfigured an intersection. None of the examples you have pointed to
have changed the routing outcomes as I check to make sure I understand
what someone was trying to map before I fix it.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:25:31 +1000
From: Andrew Davidson <theswavu at gmail.com>
To: OpenStreetMap <talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au
Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44)
Message-ID:
<CACXR7K1Ujx2WQZF5nsGxrD+6CRp-Upx7MPaSjsvLOGg5de9xEA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Sat, 30 Apr 2022, 11:53 Andrew Davidson, <theswavu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/14044389
>
>
> Cut and paste error there. The existing no u-turn restriction is:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13909088
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220430/418ba850/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 13:53:14 +1000
From: "Phil Wyatt" <phil at wyatt-family.com>
To: "'Andrew Davidson'" <theswavu at gmail.com>,
<talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au
Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44)
Message-ID: <000d01d85c45$d472c5e0$7d5851a0$@wyatt-family.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Many thanks for the detailed explanation
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Davidson <theswavu at gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 11:54 AM
To: talk-au at openstreetmap.org
Subject: [talk-au] iD and turn restrictions (Was:Re: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44)
On 30/4/22 00:45, Anthony Panozzo wrote:
> This account is either a bot account or someone that thinks they know
> more than they actually do, every single time anybody does a routing
> correction this account comes along and ?fixes? it based on ?knowledge?
Some terminology before we start. To be valid a turn restriction relation needs to have:
1. A way with the role "from"
2. A way with the role "to"
3. One or more "via" s that can be either a node or one or more ways 4. The members must connect in a way that you can travel
When I say "broken" I mean that one of the rules is broken and when I say "knowledge" I mean I know what a valid turn restriction should be.
> from the notes, let me just say I looked over some of the edit this
> account does and it breaks the routing for the most part, Changeset:
> 120344373 | OpenStreetMap
This changeset deleted this turn restriction:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13905961
which you added in changeset 118257827 and then broke in 118293106 (it only had a node via member). When I reviewed this one I decided to delete it because it would only duplicate this turn restriction:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/14044389
which you added in changeset 119769921, if I fixed it.
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120344373> and Changeset:
> 120198383 | OpenStreetMap
This intersection had 15 broken turn restriction relation in it:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477255
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477256
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477257
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477258
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477260
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477261
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477263
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477268
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13477269
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13557714
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761157
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761161
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761169
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13761170
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/13991446
You broke 14 and added one new broken relation (13991446). While I was deleting these I noticed that the intersection had some sort of cross-your-heart thing going on with added ways for turn lanes, so I simplified it to a standard traffic light box intersection:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-34.76387/138.59277
You can turn right from each arm which means we don't have to have any no-right turns. There are 4 no-left turns because each approach has a slip lane. Since it's SA and at traffic lights then there are four no u-turns to cover that. This is exactly the same routing information that was there before, but now in a simpler easier to maintain format.
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120198383#map=17/-34.76452/13
> 8.59301> are two examples of this account breaking routing, ive been
> wasting my time spending hours and hours fixing routing just for this
> shitty bot to come along and fuck it all up over and over again, I
> would like to ask DWG to take a real close look at this account and
> see if it can be banned from any further edits under the bot edit
> policy or straight out vandalism!
I am not a bot. Just a mapper with overpass, the JOSM validator, the to-do plugin, and many hours of puzzling over the question of what a broken turn restriction relation was supposed to be doing.
A couple of years ago I spent quite a bit of time fixing all the turn restrictions around AU, but I have to keep coming back every couple of months, as 100-200 newly broken ones get created every month. Mostly because iD will quietly break existing turn restrictions or let you create invalid ones and then upload them to OSM. I used to put changeset comments on the ones that had broken them until a user asked me how they could stop doing it and I discovered that there isn't a way to do that in iD.
My fixes should not be changing any routing outcomes as they are almost all deleting turn restrictions that iD didn't clean up after a mapper reconfigured an intersection. None of the examples you have pointed to have changed the routing outcomes as I check to make sure I understand what someone was trying to map before I fix it.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 14:00:38 +1000
From: "Phil Wyatt" <phil at wyatt-family.com>
To: "OSM-Au" <talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: [talk-au] FW: Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44
Message-ID: <001301d85c46$dc381a40$94a84ec0$@wyatt-family.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Phil Wyatt <phil at wyatt-family.com>
Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 2:00 PM
To: 'Anthony Panozzo' <panozz at outlook.com>
Subject: RE: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44
Hi Anthony,
There are multiple tools out there for finding 'errors' in OSM data and many
people use them to keep the OSM data up to date. You might also like to
share the OSM software that you are using on your vehicle GPS as it may turn
out that it doesn't handle relations or routing of some situations.
Cheers - Phil
From: Anthony Panozzo <panozz at outlook.com <mailto:panozz at outlook.com> >
Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 10:35 AM
To: Phil Wyatt <phil at wyatt-family.com <mailto:phil at wyatt-family.com> >
Subject: RE: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44
The biggest issue I have with this account is that they don't find routing
errors on their own, this person stalks other peoples edits and "correcs"
them using knowledge as their source, I find these routing errors 100%
myself in real world situations, I have been editing and using OSM on my car
gps for many years, this user edits other users edits based on no knowledge
of the intersection at all, having a user like this should put anyone off
making any routing edits when this person randomly edits 10 different
intersections in 10 minutes and says they have knowledge.
From: Phil Wyatt <mailto:phil at wyatt-family.com>
Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 9:44 AM
To: 'Anthony Panozzo' <mailto:panozz at outlook.com> ;
talk-au at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: RE: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44
Hi Anthony (slice0),
Can I suggest the best way to get some resolution is to actually spell out
in a changeset comment why you think the change made by Swavu is incorrect.
That way everyone gets to learn from 'conflicts'. I also suggest you
restrain your language or you may also face the wrath of the DWG.
PS Swavu is not a bot.
Cheers - Phil (tastrax)
From: Anthony Panozzo <panozz at outlook.com <mailto:panozz at outlook.com> >
Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2022 12:46 AM
To: talk-au at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 44
User TheSwavu
This account is either a bot account or someone that thinks they know more
than they actually do, every single time anybody does a routing correction
this account comes along and "fixes" it based on "knowledge" from the notes,
let me just say I looked over some of the edit this account does and it
breaks the routing for the most part, Changeset: 120344373 | OpenStreetMap
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120344373> and Changeset:
120198383 | OpenStreetMap
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120198383#map=17/-34.76452/138.5930
1> are two examples of this account breaking routing, ive been wasting my
time spending hours and hours fixing routing just for this shitty bot to
come along and fuck it all up over and over again, I would like to ask DWG
to take a real close look at this account and see if it can be banned from
any further edits under the bot edit policy or straight out vandalism!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220430/d0f732e2/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
------------------------------
End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 178, Issue 46
****************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220430/9825ee66/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Talk-au
mailing list