[Talk-GB] Suburbs in London/Brum - big edits

Brian Prangle bprangle at gmail.com
Wed Nov 19 21:22:16 UTC 2014


I'll defend Birmingham because I live here and I've contribruted to the
data and I've discussed its structure with other mappers. It works for us.
If we're not happy with it we'll change it ourselves. If anyone else is not
happy with it ask us and we might just agree with you (or not) and do the
necessary work. A little bit of courtesy to the mappers on the ground goes
a long way.

Regards

Brian

On 19 November 2014 20:54, John Baker <rovastar at hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> I understand the arguments against the wiki from the haters here. However
> it is used as a point of reference and should be more respected and
> anti-wiki comments are just insulting to those that actually take the
> effort to edit it. If the wiki is wrong change the wiki - the concept is
> not difficult.
> Slowly there is more cohesion between the default renderer, wiki and the
> editors just stubborn old timers in OSM that will not change.
>
> I argument that things have been there a long time therefore they are
> right is foolish. Many times things are just left because so many fear of
> changing anything as they think someone else has done it "right".  Again
> discouraging new editors in the "long tail".
> I cannot believe anyone here thinks all the changes are wrong in these
> edits. I await to see people defend the "Quarters" in Birmingham as they
> were.
> If anyone is that passionate about their own personal "standards" here
> (which is less consensus than a wiki as it is only 1) over than that is in
> more established sources like the wiki then at least put a note in there
> explaining why. That is normal practice.
>
> Reverting will just leave the status quo of leaving erroneous information
> in OSM. I am not saying all of them are right but some will be.
>
> Personally I avoid highway=path. However what about the same situation is
> in reverse. Should I tell everyone not to change highway=path to
> highway=footway?! If that is not my place, is it your place to do the
> other. However it raises the bigger issue of if there is no consensus then
> we will just get a mixture throughout the UK.
>
> Just because an area (suburb, etc) has shops in doesn't mean that should
> be classified as a village, town, etc. Just because something was a
> village, etc hundreds of years ago doesn't mean it is now.
> And no-one has ever answered "I live in the village of Peckham" to the
> question of "What town/city/village do you live in?" and yes I lived there
> too.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> From: tom at acrewoods.net
> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 18:01:33 +0000
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Suburbs in London/Brum - big edits
> To: ajrlists at gmail.com
> CC: rovastar at hotmail.com; talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
>
>
> Thanks for all the comments.
>
> Could somebody revert the two London changesets? The move to the
> alternative hierarchy of suburb/quarter/etc can always be done later after
> some more considered thought. These existing hierarchy was a settled
> consensus of sorts resulting from years of tweaks. I myself spent quite a
> bit of time reviewing all the places in South East London some years ago.
>
> To respond to John, discussions on the wiki have always involved a fairly
> small number of mappers, and the convention is that you shouldn't go around
> changing long-established data because some people on the wiki decided one
> logical approach was the best. As Richard Fairhurst said in the comments to
> the changeset, the fact that these place names have been there for a long
> time suggests there is a good reason for them to be so. We've not just
> overlooked this all those years. The same could be said of that awful tag
> "highway=path", which has been around for a long time but which I - and
> many others - refuse to use. It's fine if you want to use it, but please
> don't go changing highway=footpath and so on to highway=path because some
> wiki page says it's better.
>
> Personally, I think it is important to recognise that Peckham, Lewisham,
> Brixton, Wimbledon and so on are town centres, they are not just suburbs.
> They are recognised as such in planning policy, they fulfil an important
> town centre function, and would be considered town centres by many people
> who live, work and shop there. This isn't tagging for the renderer, it's
> getting the hierarchy correct.
>
> Regards,
> Tom
>
> On 19 November 2014 17:47, Andy Robinson <ajrlists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> We should not blindly assume that the ordered way as described on the wiki
> is right. It may be entirely logical and reasonable but it might not
> reflect the local situation on the ground. I’ve started a Birmingham
> related thread on the west mids list in order that those of is with a
> detailed knowledge of Brum can work through and see whether any of the
> “place” objects need adjustment. Many were put in as they are many years
> ago so it’s good to have a look again. It’s not about tagging for the
> renderer or even tagging for logic. It’s just tagging for the real world.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* John Baker [mailto:rovastar at hotmail.com]
> *Sent:* 19 November 2014 17:27
> *To:* Tom Chance; talk-gb OSM List E-mail
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Suburbs in London/Brum - big edits
>
>
>
>
> Lets put some clarity on this.
>
> a) they are not big edits. They are a handful of nodes.
> b) "advice now given in the wiki" and "self-appointed wiki editors"
> implies that suddenly some rouge wiki editor changed something that in
> general the OSM community doesn't agree with. Suburbs are well established.
> In fact that description line is over 3 years old! And from that pages
> inception in September 2006 there is a similar line of text about not using
> village, etc and using suburbs, etc. Even for someone that doesn't like
> change it is hardly a rapid, sweeping one.
>
> To be honest I have never noticed (and have mapped plenty in London)
> before but it sounds like the reasons to keep it as is for, Peckham as a
> village or whatever, is a clear case of mapping for the renderer.
>
> Maybe we should also look at how other large international cities have
> mapped these areas.
>
> I am all for changes some/many/all of these to a more correct and modern
> (well post 09/2006) standard.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: tom at acrewoods.net
> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:07:16 +0000
> To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Suburbs in London/Brum - big edits
>
> Hello there,
>
>
>
> As somebody who dislikes change, I was slightly horrified to see these
> edits:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26783815
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26795471
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26567938
>
>
>
> The user has changed a whole lot of places within London and Birmingham
> that were tagged as town / village / hamlet / etc. to place=suburb. He
> appears to be following the advice now given on the wiki, that:
>
>
>
> "Areas of a town/city should not be tagged with place=town, place=village
> or place=hamlet. These should only be used for distinct settlements."
>
>
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dsuburb
>
>
>
> Apart from the fact that I cannot stand it when the work of self-appointed
> wiki editors leads to somebody making sweeping edits of others' work, I
> also really don't like losing the hierarchy of place implicit in Wimbledon
> being marked as a town, Forest Hill a village, Belleden a hamlet, and so
> on, and them all just becoming 'suburb'. Apart from the fact that many
> places in London were historically towns in their own right, they are often
> also regarded as town centres.
>
>
>
> But should we swallow this and move to the use of
> place=suburb/quarter/neighbourhood?
>
>
>
> If so, I'd like to do this properly, instead of the process that this user
> has gone through to just make everything 'suburb'.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20141119/e1de39d8/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list