[Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA

OSM Volunteer stevea steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Tue Aug 2 18:54:18 UTC 2016


Thank you, Meg.  I also applaud the addition of sidewalk data to OSM.  I have begun substantial work on this in the downtown pedestrian-oriented areas of Santa Cruz, California (37N 122W).  Yes, this can be a challenging data set to enter for a variety of reasons, especially if it is an import (my work was/is not an import).  Getting a rich set of import data tags properly associated with OSM tags (which, how, what...) can be daunting, especially with a schema that is newly proposed.  However, as your schema is simultaneously proposed, and by you, you might experience both the inherent difficulties that "new" brings to the task, as well as the benefits of "yes, invented here" for your particular dataset.  That's a double-edged sword, so please wield carefully!

Limited-mobility sidewalk data in OSM is what I might characterize as an "it's about time!" dataset:  the world just does not have enough of these and OSM is an ideal place for pedestrians and wheelchair/limited-mobility users alike to enjoy such repositories of truly helpful geographic data.  Renderers and routers alike can and will evolve for and with these data.  While I agree that some thought must go into the development of a new schema to ease the task of writing renderers and routers for specific datasets like sidewalks, we must not let perfection be the enemy of the good:  decent datasets should not be discouraged from being entered simply because "ideal" tools (like renderers and routers that specifically consume these data) do not yet exist today.  This is a balancing act along a spectrum, and we must not err too far on the side of "scare away the entry of good data."  We also have a tenet of "don't code for the renderer," which is also too far in a wrong direction.

Frederik, if "Having individual geometries for every single sidewalk on the planet will not only massively increase the data volume but also require new and better tools for editing," then OSM will cope with this by technically "dealing with" the growth in data (OSM does want proper and correct data growth, don't we?) as well as evolving our tools so that editing becomes straightforward.  We can do both of those, well, properly paced and simultaneously.  Notice I didn't say "perfect and complete before we even start entering data," I said "straightforward."

Any data worth uploading to OSM should be of the utmost, highest quality (vetted for correctness as to accuracy and compliance with any schema, QA'd, double-checked after entry...), yet we must not let importation frighten us.  Yes, it must give us pause, as we reflect and study the most proper method (or even a "rather proper" method) to enter the highest quality version of the data we are able to achieve.  But this attitude of "if import, Danger-Danger, it's likely a bad idea..." is just too harsh.  Sure, the Import Guidelines we have evolved are "about right" so that the community can properly vet imports and some determination can be made as to the quality of method and technical skills involved in the proposed process.  Let's learn from bad imports, as it appears that Frederik (especially) has done, since the messes involved in untangling them can be substantial (as Frederik knows first-hand).  I myself have untangled many, many OSM bad edits, bad imports and bad actors, so even though I'm not DWG, I have the passion and experience to both not want bad imports and to do what is necessary when/as/if they happen.  (The USA, myself included, continues to untangle poor TIGER data and will for many years).  The best course of action to prevent bad imports is to nip them in the bud, before they happen and/or at the beginning of a potentially bad process.  But repeated attempts at wholesale shutdown of carefully-vetted imports before they even start via discouragement and a challenging attitude simply goes too far.

SteveA
California


> On Aug 2, 2016, at 7:43 AM, talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:
> 
> Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to
> 	talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	talk-us-owner at openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-us digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA (Meg Drouhard)
>   2. Re: Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
>      (Frederik Ramm)
>   3. Re: Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
>      (Bryan Housel)
>   4. Re: Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
>      (Martijn van Exel)
>   5. Re: Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
>      (Bill Ricker)
>   6. Re: Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
>      (Martijn van Exel)
> 
> From: Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu>
> Subject: [Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
> Date: August 1, 2016 at 2:35:15 PM PDT
> To: Talk-us at openstreetmap.org, Talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org, Imports at openstreetmap.org
> Cc: info at opensidewalks.com
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> We are proposing to import open municipal sidewalk data from the city of Seattle as described in this proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seattle,_Washington/Sidewalk_Import.
> 
> Imports will be tagged according to the sidewalk schema that we propose here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sidewalk_schema.  The schema is a proposal for standardization of conventions, rather than changing or adding tags, and it is particularly concerned with features of sidewalks that may aid or impede travel for people with limited mobility. 
> 
> We are still in the process of testing our deployment of the OSM Tasking Manager for this purpose, but we appreciate any feedback you may have either through our discussion pages or by email.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Meg Drouhard
> 
> 
> 
> From: Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
> Date: August 2, 2016 at 6:01:36 AM PDT
> To: Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu>, Talk-us at openstreetmap.org, Talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org, Imports at openstreetmap.org
> Cc: info at opensidewalks.com
> 
> 
> Meg,
> 
>   sidewalk tagging in OSM is a complex issue. The fact that sidewalks
> are not tagged as individual geometries is not purely a shortcoming,  it
> is a compromise that keeps OSM data editable. Having individual
> geometries for every single sidewalk on the planet will not only
> massively increase the data volume but also require new and better tools
> for editing, e.g. moving the geometry of a street without having to move
> three parallel lines manually and so on.
> 
> There have been several local imports of sidewalk data that were removed
> again because lack of prior discussion and/or because they were
> single-purpose imports that did not care about integration with the rest
> of OSM (for example: what should rendering engines do with sidewalks;
> how do they integrate with normal footways; how is a sidewalk linked to
> the road along which it runs so that routing engines can say "follow
> sidewalk along XY road" instead of "follow unnamed footway"; how can
> routing and rendering use individual sidewalks and still gracefully fall
> back to another method where these are not defined, and so on).
> 
> People are experimenting with different ways of mapping sidewalks.
> Under no circumstances should you perform an import that creates facts
> before your proposal for separate mapping of sidewalks has been
> discussed more widely.
> 
> Several ideas have been proposed to get around mapping sidewalks as
> individual geometries, which is in many ways the most primitive way to
> tackle the problem and the one that puts the most work on the shoulders
> of our volunteers.
> 
> Your wiki page states that you had "feedback from the global OSM
> community"; I'm surprised that these details seem to have escaped you
> until now. Which sidewalk mapping experiments in OSM have you studied,
> and what have you learned? Which global OSM community did you talk to
> and where?
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Bryan Housel <bryan at 7thposition.com>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
> Date: August 2, 2016 at 6:28:26 AM PDT
> To: Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu>
> Cc: Talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org, Imports at openstreetmap.org, info at opensidewalks.com, osm-talk-us <Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> 
> 
> Meg this is excellent!
> 
> Thank you for sharing your plans with `talk-us` and `talk-us-pugetsound`.  I’m looking forward to seeing this public data source imported into OpenStreetMap.  Given that your team is located in Seattle and is very involved with the local community there, I don’t see any issues. 
> 
> I think it is great that you are following the same process used by the various building import projects in other cities, and that you are taking responsibility for manual review of the data prior to importing.
> 
> Also, I’ve reviewed the proposed sidewalk schema and it aligns perfectly with North American sidewalk tagging conventions.
> 
> Good luck and let me know if I can be helpful in any way..
> 
> Bryan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 1, 2016, at 5:35 PM, Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> We are proposing to import open municipal sidewalk data from the city of Seattle as described in this proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seattle,_Washington/Sidewalk_Import.
>> 
>> Imports will be tagged according to the sidewalk schema that we propose here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sidewalk_schema.  The schema is a proposal for standardization of conventions, rather than changing or adding tags, and it is particularly concerned with features of sidewalks that may aid or impede travel for people with limited mobility. 
>> 
>> We are still in the process of testing our deployment of the OSM Tasking Manager for this purpose, but we appreciate any feedback you may have either through our discussion pages or by email.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Meg Drouhard
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Martijn van Exel <martijn at openstreetmap.us>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
> Date: August 2, 2016 at 7:26:08 AM PDT
> To: Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu>
> Cc: "talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org>, "imports at openstreetmap.org" <Imports at openstreetmap.org>, info at opensidewalks.com, OSM Talk US <Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> 
> 
> Meg, 
> 
> I applaud more sidewalk data in OSM. I started adding them in SLC some time ago. Then went through a phase where I thought they were redundant and that we could cover every use case with the sidewalk=* tags on ways. Not so.
> 
> Let me know if MapRoulette can help here. We did a similar challenge with NYC bike lanes before with some success.
> 
> Martijn
> 
> Martijn van Exel
> Secretary, US Chapter
> OpenStreetMap
> http://openstreetmap.us/
> http://osm.org/
> skype: mvexel
> 
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> We are proposing to import open municipal sidewalk data from the city of Seattle as described in this proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seattle,_Washington/Sidewalk_Import.
> 
> Imports will be tagged according to the sidewalk schema that we propose here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sidewalk_schema.  The schema is a proposal for standardization of conventions, rather than changing or adding tags, and it is particularly concerned with features of sidewalks that may aid or impede travel for people with limited mobility. 
> 
> We are still in the process of testing our deployment of the OSM Tasking Manager for this purpose, but we appreciate any feedback you may have either through our discussion pages or by email.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Meg Drouhard
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
> Date: August 2, 2016 at 7:34:28 AM PDT
> To: Martijn van Exel <martijn at openstreetmap.us>
> Cc: Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu>, "imports at openstreetmap.org" <Imports at openstreetmap.org>, OSM Talk US <Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>, info at opensidewalks.com, "talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org>
> 
> 
> As a mapper and map users whose household includes a wheelchair user, I applaud the idea of routable curb-cuts and crossings. 
> 
> What is the DB implication of urban ways trebling in ways, nodes is a discussion that needs to happen - is this a real or potential problem?   Is it easy to extract/filter for uses that don't require footpaths ? 
>> 
> 
> 
> From: Martijn van Exel <m at rtijn.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA
> Date: August 2, 2016 at 7:43:02 AM PDT
> To: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
> Cc: Meg Drouhard <mdrouhar at uw.edu>, "imports at openstreetmap.org" <Imports at openstreetmap.org>, OSM Talk US <Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>, info at opensidewalks.com, "talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-us-pugetsound at openstreetmap.org>
> 
> 
> Bill, 
> 
> To my mind the tools and infrastructure should be catering to the mappers' needs and not the other way around, so whatever reasonable requirements this tagging scheme may impose, the OSM platform should be able to absorb. Not my use of the word 'reasonable' --> in the spirit of OSM any scheme should be the simplest it can be while being able to represent the reality it means to represent.
> 
> Martijn
> 
> Martijn van Exel
> http://mvexel.github.io/
> 
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com> wrote:
> As a mapper and map users whose household includes a wheelchair user, I applaud the idea of routable curb-cuts and crossings. 
> 
> What is the DB implication of urban ways trebling in ways, nodes is a discussion that needs to happen - is this a real or potential problem?   Is it easy to extract/filter for uses that don't require footpaths ? 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us




More information about the Talk-us mailing list