[Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

[James Umbanhowar]

Regardless of the community's eventual solution, I think the most
important part of this event was the lack of engagement of Caliparks
and Stamen with the community.  Is there a similar process for
institutional (business, government, non-profit) editing of data as
there is for imports?  There should be.  I think institutional
engagement with OSM can bring many benefits, but has similar dangers as
imports. 

James

On Thu, 2016-03-24 at 13:50 +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/24/2016 11:26 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
> > 
> > They tagged them as "social_path", according to their blog entry
> > [1]
> Thank you for the link. This is what I feared.
> 
> highway=social_path is certainly unacceptable - a self-made tag that
> essentially deletes the data for all other consumers.
> 
> There would have been numerous other options that would have allowed
> them to single out the tracks they want - for example, tagging the
> official ones with an "operator" tag, or putting them into suitable
> relations or so. Had any of the players involved taken the time to
> ask
> on this list, I'm sure these options would have been pointed out to
> them.
> 
> As it stands, removing a proper, established highway tag and
> replacing
> it with something that nobody knows is just a little bit better than
> removing the way altogether.
> 
> To make matters worse, it seems that the issue has been pointed out
> almost half a year ago, and has not led to the issue being fixed:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34599982
> 
> It is obvious to me that all occurrences of highway=social_path need
> to
> be replaced with whatever they were before. I'd normally say let's
> give
> them some time to come up with a better idea but seeing that the
> problem
> has been highlighted to them pretty much at the time they made the
> edits
> 5 months ago, and they haven't come up with a better idea, I'd say
> the
> time is up now.
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
>