[Talk-us] Community Involvement

[Sunburned Surveyor]

It would be interesting to see what organic growth might come from a
set of well documented tagging and geometry creation/editing
guidelines for OSM. Notice I say "guidelines". Maybe that is a better
word than "standard", which may sound restrictive. I don't think an
"enforcement" approach would work with OSM. However, sharing a tagging
and geometry creation/editing strategy that people can adopt if they
choose might work. Similar approaches have been succesful in the open
source software world.

When I think about building a OSM data import/export plug-in for
OpenJUMP, I think a lot about tags. On import I would need to set up
some type of analysis of tag frequency in the imported data. Then I
would need to let the user set some type of filtering to determine
which tags became feature attributes. For example: If a tag occurs in
75% of the features being imported, create an attribute on all
features for this tag. Otherwise, ignore this tag.

Obviously being able to increase the consistency of tagging would make
this type of data import more useful. That's what got me thinking
about it, anyways.

I see some seriuos opportunity for OSM improvement there.

I need to do some more work to test some of these concepts before I
keep shooting my mouth off. I'll keep listening to this mailing list
and I look forward to seeing what the OSM US organization can
accomplish. I commend Serge and the others for their hard work on
this.

Landon

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Toby Murray <toby.murray at gmail.com> wrote:
> My thoughts about OSM US:
>
> I don't know if you will have resources for this but it would be nice
> to have some legally authoritative information when dealing with
> potential government data sources. Since copyright laws vary by
> country this seems like a good thing for a national chapter to deal
> with.
>
> Maybe even at the state level. I found out (by asking) that the Kansas
> DoT considers all the maps on their website to be in the public domain
> so they are all usable in OSM. Is this the case in other states? I'm
> not suggesting that OSM US start trying to contact state government
> divisions in all 50 states but perhaps there could be some suggestions
> on how to initiate contact with a government agency.  What about the
> impact of the Santa Clara county lawsuit back in 2009? Are there any
> parts of that decision that could be used as a precedent in other
> jurisdictions? My county is pretty awesome in that they gave me
> permission to use their 6" aerial imagery for tracing but when I asked
> the county next door, I was told that they charge for all their GIS
> data, end of story.
>
> I know the first request I sent to my county GIS department was
> completely inadequate since I didn't really understand all the
> licensing issues yet. (not that I do now either...) So maybe just some
> notes or even form letters that hit on the important US specific
> copyright/license issues that need to be conveyed to potential data
> sources. Also, I see a wiki page about the UK version of FOIA but
> nothing about the US version. Although I do seem to recall something
> about FOIA not really being that useful for OSM...
>
>
> Also, concerning some of the comments on tagging in this thread:
>
> It is great that we can use any tags we want. But at the same time,
> some consistency is absolutely necessary to be able to actually use
> the data in a global environment. Why do we all use highway=* tags for
> roads? That wouldn't be my first impulse, for most city roads at
> least, but we do it for consistency.
>
> In my day job, data inconsistencies almost always point to a problem
> that needs to be fixed so I will admit that I am biased towards
> stricter guidelines. However also as a new mapper I have found it
> difficult to figure out how to map some relatively simple things
> "correctly." Sometimes there is nothing but a stub page on the wiki,
> sometimes there are 2 or 3 competing proposals, all of which have been
> idle for over a year. Several times this has led me to just "tag for
> the renderer" since that was the most authoritative source available.
> I have seen the same thing happening with other new mappers.
>
> I firmly believe that a lot of the time "people use different tags as
> they see fit and that's the way it should be" should really be "people
> use different tags because they weren't able to easily figure out how
> other people have tagged this feature." Coming up with a set of
> guidelines would be much more appreciated and less looked upon as
> "restricting" as some people seem to think. Look at the discussion
> happening in the mapquest thread about state highways. No one is
> saying "IT SHOULD BE DONE THIS WAY!" but rather "it would be nice to
> have consensus"
>
> Yes, there is tagstat but that isn't exactly the most user friendly
> thing either at least until you have a couple weeks of working with
> OSM data under your belt.
>
>
>
> Toby
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>