[Talk-GB] Railway edits in the UK that could perhaps benefit from a bit of checking.

Stuart Reynolds stuart at travelinesoutheast.org.uk
Wed Nov 12 11:25:00 UTC 2014


OK. I agree that it is odd, but my ability to influence them will be restricted to UK edits that they will have done (theoretically) to resolve issues that we have raised with them. I'll take a look at some of the other edits referred to in the trail below.

Regards,
Stuart

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Robinson [mailto:ajrlists at gmail.com] 
Sent: 12 November 2014 11:09 AM
To: Stuart Reynolds; 'SomeoneElse'; talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Cc: project
Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] Railway edits in the UK that could perhaps benefit from a bit of checking.

Here's just one example of an odd type of edit. Adding priority=yard to rail objects.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/96973880

I did not see anything on the schema page to suggest odd tags:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.openstreetmap.org%2Fwiki%2F%25C3%2596V_Firma_Mentz_Datenverarbeitung_GmbH%2FModellierungsvorschl%25C3%25A4ge

Cheers
Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Reynolds [mailto:stuart at travelinesoutheast.org.uk]
Sent: 12 November 2014 10:59
To: SomeoneElse; talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Cc: project
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Railway edits in the UK that could perhaps benefit from a bit of checking.

Greetings, all.

Mentz (aka "mdv") is a German company that provides the journey planner used by a number of the traveline regions, as well as for Transport for London. As you may recall from my previous posts, a number traveline regions are now using OSM as the GIS. We found a problem (internally) with how railways were mapped, and mdv told us that they had found a way around it. It looks like that involved amending things in ways that are not appropriate.

Please pass the details back to me, and I will discuss it with them and also with the community if things need reverting.

Regards,
Stuart

-----Original Message-----
From: SomeoneElse [mailto:lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk]
Sent: 12 November 2014 10:23 AM
To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Railway edits in the UK that could perhaps benefit from a bit of checking.

More info on this - it seems to be a bunch of people working for this
company:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/%C3%96V_Firma_Mentz_Datenverarbeitung_GmbH

I've had no reply from the mapper that I tried to contact (although they have fixed at least one of the problems that they created) so I've tried again via direct message, comment on the firm's OSM wiki page and an OSM message to the company's main OSM account.

What concerns me is that they're still editing (with various accounts).  
It's relatively easy to trace straight lines from Bing, but it needs experience and interpretation (and a local survey!) to see how everything on the ground relates to everything else.

Based on their error rate so far I'd definitely still suggest that local mappers check their edits.

Cheers,

Andy


On 08/11/2014 22:51, SomeoneElse wrote:
> An anonymous note adder (http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/267719) and 
> someone on IRC noticed some problematical railway edits near
> Sutton-in-Ashfield:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/311380489#map=15/53.1247/-1.2346&laye
> rs=N
>
>
> It looks like an attempt to dual the Robin Hood line went a bit wrong 
> and ended up slicing through an industrial estate and some areas of 
> housing (though I'm sure it was "cock-up rather than conspiracy" as 
> Sir Bernard Ingham would have said).  Looking at some other edits in 
> the same changeset, there are some other, less obvious, issues too, 
> which I've added to the changeset discussion:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26590071
>
> The most obvious problem seems to be "tracing the railway in but not 
> joining properly to other features (such as crossings)".  Some 
> information (e.g. "cutting=yes") has also been lost.
>
> Another local changeset:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26587435
> has some similar issues.
>
> There have been a number of other edits, some with rather a lot of 
> deletions in them, including:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26613977
>
> All of these changesets could probably also benefit from a review from 
> local mappers to identify potential issues.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list