[Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 168, Issue 36

Tue Feb 22 05:49:01 UTC 2022

I can back ya up - I think a bunch of us mapped out things using the MLI at
one time or anotehr. As for batch imports - we don't have "huge" groups in
MB, most of the mappers I either know, or have seen a few times. Like look
at the "active mappers in manitoba" list... 6 of us!
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Users_in_Manitoba
Also - did they check the discussion on Manitoba Wiki.... that specifically
says MLI?
*shrugs*

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 10:02 PM <talk-ca-request at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
>         talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         talk-ca-request at openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         talk-ca-owner at openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Talk-CA (Sam Dyck)
>    2. Re: Talk-CA (John Whelan)
>    3. Re: Talk-CA (Pierre B?land)
>    4. Re: Talk-CA (Jarek Pi?rkowski)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 18:26:19 -0700
> From: Sam Dyck <samueldyck at gmail.com>
> To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: [Talk-ca] Talk-CA
> Message-ID:
>         <CAP+fbPu+o-rz=sK1he2REZFS=
> PCsBUSfK629ZvwUB6dTwO5TsQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi all
>
> So some editor in Poland dug up this import
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/6121088> I did back in 2010 of
> Manitoba Lands Initiative building data and is demanding proof that we
> followed proper procedures.
>
> I explained the MLI license, and that it was discussed on this mailing
> list, but they seem to be adamant I provide receipts that we followed the
> correct procedure, including approval from the Imports mailing list. The
> challenge is that a user who is no longer active initiated the import, and
> I was under the impression he had gotten the correct approval. Does anyone
> remember this?
>
> I know why procedure exists, but it's frustrating to see this sort of
> legalism for an edit older than I a decade. I was an idealistic teenager
> when I made this import. Eleven years later I deal with bureaucracy all day
> at work, and just want to make usable maps. Again, not suggesting we throw
> out the rule book, but surely there's a reasonable approach.
>
> Anyway, my feelings aside, does anyone remember this?
>
> Sam
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220221/a8ac2bce/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 20:51:56 -0500
> From: John Whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> To: Sam Dyck <samueldyck at gmail.com>
> Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-CA
> Message-ID: <00039125-b7ca-ea99-b8fe-dcdfbb1c643f at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> I'd tend to suggest entropy as a defense. In other words this data has
> been in the map for a considerable length of time.? Details have been
> added to the buildings and buildings have not been added from the Stats
> Canada building whatever since buildings were already mapped.
>
> In 2017 we imported buildings in Ottawa.? A group of local mappers
> basically met over coffee and made the decision to do the import.? I
> suspect we did not record who was at the meeting.
>
> We did follow the import mailing list and it eventually needed the LWG
> to confirm the data was acceptable, but many earlier imports in Canada
> were done without involving the import mailing list.
>
> Highway names in Ottawa for example in 2010.? It was a local decision
> made by local mappers at the time and I really can't remember who was
> round the coffee table.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> Sam Dyck wrote on 2/21/2022 8:26 PM:
> > Hi all
> >
> > So some editor in Poland dug up this import
> > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/6121088> I did back in 2010
> > of Manitoba Lands Initiative building data and is demanding proof that
> > we followed proper procedures.
> >
> > I explained the MLI license, and that it was discussed on this mailing
> > list, but they seem to be adamant I provide receipts that we followed
> > the correct procedure, including approval from the Imports mailing
> > list. The challenge is that a user who is no longer active initiated
> > the import, and I was under the impression he had gotten the correct
> > approval. Does anyone remember this?
> >
> > I know why procedure exists, but it's frustrating to see this sort of
> > legalism for an edit older than I a decade. I was an idealistic
> > teenager when I made this import. Eleven years later I deal with
> > bureaucracy all day at work, and just want to make usable maps. Again,
> > not suggesting we throw out the rule book, but surely there's a
> > reasonable approach.
> >
> > Anyway, my feelings aside, does anyone remember this?
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ca mailing list
> > Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> --
> Sent from Postbox <https://www.postbox-inc.com>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220221/743d1d60/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 02:03:11 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Pierre B?land <pierzenh at yahoo.fr>
> To: Sam Dyck <samueldyck at gmail.com>, John Whelan
>         <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-CA
> Message-ID: <936768934.1331864.1645495391896 at mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> La meilleure chose est de r?pondre que cet import a ?t? discut? par la
> communaut? osm du Canada ? l'?poque, cela avant l'implantation des r?gles
> d'import.
>  De m?moire, les r?gles? d'import avec le besoin de communiquer avec la
> liste import ont ?t? implant?es apr?s 2010.
> La premi?re ?dition de la page wiki
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines est en 2013.?
> Pierre
>
>
>     Le lundi 21 f?vrier 2022, 20 h 53 min 17 s UTC?5, John Whelan <
> jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> a ?crit :
>
>  I'd tend to suggest entropy as a defense.? In other words this data has
> been in the map for a considerable length of time.? Details have been added
> to the buildings and buildings have not been added from the Stats Canada
> building whatever since buildings were already mapped.
>
> In 2017 we imported buildings in Ottawa.? A group of local mappers
> basically met over coffee and made the decision to do the import.? I
> suspect we did not record who was at the meeting.
>
> We did follow the import mailing list and it eventually needed the LWG to
> confirm the data was acceptable, but many earlier imports in Canada were
> done without involving the import mailing list.?
>
> Highway names in Ottawa for example in 2010.? It was a local decision made
> by local mappers at the time and I really can't remember who was round the
> coffee table.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> Sam Dyck wrote on 2/21/2022 8:26 PM:
>
>
> Hi all
> So some editor in Poland dug up this import I did back in 2010 of Manitoba
> Lands Initiative building data and is demanding proof that we followed
> proper procedures.
>
> I explained the MLI license, and that it was discussed on this mailing
> list, but they seem to be adamant I provide receipts that we followed the
> correct procedure, including approval from the Imports mailing list. The
> challenge is that a user who is no longer active initiated the import, and
> I was under the impression he had gotten the correct approval. Does anyone
> remember this?
>
> I know why procedure exists, but it's frustrating to see this sort of
> legalism for an edit older than I a decade. I was an idealistic teenager
> when I made this import. Eleven years later I deal with bureaucracy all day
> at work, and just want to make usable maps. Again, not suggesting we throw
> out the rule book, but surely there's a reasonable approach.
> Anyway, my feelings aside, does anyone remember this?
> Sam
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> --
> Sent from Postbox_______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220222/40c4e820/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 22:05:39 -0500
> From: Jarek Pi?rkowski <jarekp at gmail.com>
> To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-CA
> Message-ID:
>         <CACV3h2mkhU7XnrVRE4KbEChs5fEw6mnt-9M1jmpOkDFMRu=
> 1xg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 at 21:04, Pierre B?land via Talk-ca
> <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > La premi?re ?dition de la page wiki
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines est en 2013.
>
> Actually it was in 2008. It looked like 2013 because Mediawiki
> software by default shows 50 revisions in a page's history.
>
> See
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Import/Guidelines&offset=20130102003605%7C850276&limit=500&action=history
> for the full history and
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Import/Guidelines&oldid=69767
> for the first revision.
>
> In December 2009, the wiki page revision
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Import/Guidelines&oldid=384558
> said "Discuss your import on the imports at openstreetmap.org mailing
> list and/or with appropriate local communities." Perhaps we could try
> an emphasis on "and/or".
>
> I rather doubt a 12-year-old import would get undone now, so another
> option would be to just invite the complainant, if they think action
> must be taken, to follow up with imports mailing list and/or DWG.
>
> --Jarek
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Talk-ca Digest, Vol 168, Issue 36
> ****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220221/cbd3195a/attachment-0001.htm>