Could it be that quantity=* is from an import, or from when there was lesser quality aerial imagery. So only possible to outline the larger area, but some ground survey/knowledge or authority records were able to specify how many courts are available.

If so, I see this as part of the design of OpenStreetMap. Limited quality data has been put into OSM but it is better than nothing. That data can be improved/replaced when better knowledge/skills/sources become available. As you’ve demonstrated, the initial data is even helpful to finding where there is ability to improve OpenStreetMap.

Keep up the good work, and thanks for sharing!

Google Translate al español (English below)

Compruebo “en el suelo” lo que me dice la nota. no confío en eso A menudo confirmo las notas mientras mapeo otras cosas en el área. Entonces, un compromiso no es igual a una nota fija, creo que está bien.

La mitad de las notas en mi área son agregadas por mapeadores (yo mismo y otros) que saben que algo ha cambiado o está en proceso de cambio, pero necesitan una visita para obtener los detalles.

English (original)

I check “on the ground” what the note tells me. I do not trust it. Often I will confirm notes while mapping other things in the area. So one commit is not equal to one note fixed, I think this is fine.

Half the notes in my area are added by mappers (myself & others) that know something has changed or is in the process of changing, but needs a visit to get the detail

I understand what you suggest about the iD walk through having a more complex or fully mapped area, but nowhere has every type of feature and lots of features could overwhelm beginners. What I usually suggest is that people look at areas near them, or the next village/city/area to them. It’s more likely to ha e similar features and you might discover something you hadn’t thought to record or map.

Also a good place to learn about things to map is the upcoming State of the Map conference. Occasionally we get a talk from a newcommer and it’s really insightful (so different to my experience as a 15+ years OSMer). You might want to consider submitting a lighting talk to share your experience.

Between your two coloured-tables (group scores, and group scores if adopting proposed changes) there is a drop in the total number of softwares used. You don’t point out that drop, or explain why it is there.

I suspect that it is if the groups consolidate use of similar software. E.g. a group currently uses two code-hosting platforms that are closed, they would score 0/2 (0%). Switching to only use your suggestion they would score 1/1 (100%). Consolidating should have been done as it’s own step and an extra table included because it greatly affects the percentage and thus the colours.

Your recommendations look good with so much yellow/red turning yellow/green. It won’t be easy for all groups to switch, especially those with lots of software used and integrated into the team workflows or containing vital historic information. Switching may take time, especially with all the volunteers involved. I hope you appreciate that, and I thank you for the recommendations which is surely a helpful step.

The two guys who spoke at State of the Map in Heidelberg were friendly and seemed really good for the project, interested in getting things right (like attribution).

However they are part of a larger machine, and they blamed issues on lack of understanding of OSM by other parts in the organisation that are far than them. I.e. a new feature gets added, uses a map, doesn’t know attribution has to be added if it’s OSM, then the complaint has to reach the correct person who will respond and fix it. The chap I spoke to after his talk (more time in the break) was keen to know where they were still lacking attribution.

It’s very bad that Facebook didn’t anticipate a question about attribution. It probably would have been good for them to have someone present that could be pointed out and hold a discussion on during the break (it was not really connected to the talk). Of course they could also release a statement on how they are wanting to do better, and they could actually be better.

Jubal Harpster says being on the OSMF board doesn’t have real power, but that doesn’t stop the intention being to make a power grab (it at least feels like that reading some comments).

So what are we doing “right” in Russia?

chillly gives a good response about ground truth and a “private” sign. Sometimes these can be difficult to spot unless you’re looking out for them. These tracks would be tagged with access=private (although how legal the sign is may be debated, but that’s not for this).

For deliveries, you may want to assume access=private is acceptable to use to get to the destination(if required) as you have assumed-permission. I would not use access=private to take a short cut.

For tracks that connect two roads (short cuts), then enough weight should be applied to highway=track that it’s unlikely to be used (because it would be slower). Additional tags such as surface and track type could be used to fine tune the weighting, but it’s very rare they’re going to be favoured in the UK for routing. Unless Amazon are now delivering using tractors.

This is a good an informative post, thank you for collecting the data.

I’m interested in some of the points (In Wizards Unite they are “inns”) that have photos. What is this data source? Could it be from the Ingress game that Niantic have? I remember at one point (1-2 years ago) they added more. They get as outdated as the base map, but are more important - such as one is a Post Office that has closed.

Understanding the voting mechanism & it’s benefits are most important. The example minority could have voted to reject the board confirmation & then they might have had a stronger chance to get their Maggie-replacement on board. However, why didn’t they have someone stand for election a month ago who could have supported Maggie on the board.

I think the action of OpenStreetMap US was right. Even without the confirmatory vote, there is presumably an opportunity in a year’s time to vote for several board places.

Great analysis & insight, thanks.

When I started reading this article, I thought it was going to ask: what if the confirmatory vote had been combined with the election of the 5th position. I.e. Would they have been elected if they were running against Waltersdorfer & Nguyễn?

So has this now been accepted (by the board) as OSMF policy? An announcement from the board would be good so we know we should be abiding by it.

I see Organised_Editing/Activities wiki doesn’t exist yet.

Here is the list again, but country names are followed by “LC” if they are an OSMF local chapter* (can someone make it highlight the row?). https://codepen.io/anon/pen/MzQerz

All except Italy are “over-represented”, but those they are not exclusive in being over-represented. This is interesting, as OSMF members in this country may find themselves choosing to be a member of one or the other, or both (and paying dues for both).

• The USA and Japan have formal OSM organisations, with membership, but they are not OSMF chapters. You may also want to look at those countries, and you could also look to compare this with HOT membership.

Oh, and changeset tags could include a source:mapillary_id=… auto-filled or things like that, maybe survey:date too.

I think there could definitely be a user base for a street-level imagery focused editor. The feature wish list needs to be worked out though.

For one, I think the Mapillary filters would be really important. Can I limit to just my images shown on the map, just images from the last month (or both those filters at once). Then it would be amazing if I can see on the map the filtered out Mapillary (i.e. there are photos here, but they don’t meet your requirements).

Pressing up & down arrows on my keyboard progresses the photos, which is handy.

(sorry for the English)

For a city in the UK I was able to get a list of the local authority operated cameras, this helped me find them in real life and then exact location on OpenStreetMap.

Knowledge of cameras can also help security by helping security operations (or related operations). I was involved with a volunteer group that helps people in the city on weekend nights. For this group I produced a special map that shows items of interest, including the local authority cameras, nearly all of these cameras can be turned remotely. We have radios to call the operators and say “please watch us, in case things go bad” or “there is a fight nearby, you should watch it and please dispatch police officers”. Of course it is very helpful to know in advance where these cameras are and where they are not! I had a time when I stopped an attack, but then the man came towards me, I was already walking back to a different road because I knew I was out of sight of the cameras.

I can imagine it would also be useful if you need evidence of something that happened. You could check the map data for nearby cameras, and plan who you need to ask to check their footage.

Hjart makes good points, on providing a note for other mappers (oh how people think aerial imagery is always correct!). News stories pushing us to check OpenStreetMap and maybe help tidy up surrounding area can be good, especially if it might be used or viewed by people wanting to understand the place.

Keeping features mapped that are not routable is still important. I might be hiking or flying, and a partial/collapsed structure could be a good landmark to confirm where I am heading towards the right city, especially if using a static map not a GPS. I might just want to make a local map of the city, and the local map is becoming a feature or talking point. Or I might be interested in searching the world for collapsed and not replaces bridges. OpenStreetMap data is used in many ways, and because a feature isn’t use for a certain use case (e.g. car routing) that shouldn’t be the only reason to delete it.

As for your tweet to this post, “Stop OSMfiddling when there are is a local community please”. I totally agree, when there are strong local communities then it is good for them to lead on making the map perfectly up-to-date for all those people sudden;y looking at their part of the world.

“Surely Northern Italy has enough trees to tempt @SK53 here” Not sure if I said that, or someone I was talking to.

Good post Blake.

HOT is maturing and it’s Gate-people will have been around for many years now. So what is/can HOT do to ensure there is a balance of gatekeepers and gateopeners?

I understand gatepeople are both openers and keepers by your explanation. I think you’re saying the grumpy gatekeepers appear to be that way (to themselves and to others) because overtime they have had to keep so many similar actions out, and that it takes a mental toll.

Something nice to say?

Negative articles like this are becoming a trend in OpenStreetMap. They are somewhat click-bait and get a lot of attention. Andy made a good comment on your article, and Ilyia gave a really positive response.

Why couldn’t your article include some of that positivity and thanks? The OSM Awards you lead is not getting anywhere near as many nominations as there are deserving recipients. It would have been great if the article pointed to seeking out more nominations.

Wow this is quite an interesting topic of trouble + amazing response.

It would be great to have it talked about at the State of the Map conference. We’ve already selected talks, but there will be some slots to sign-up for 5 minute lightning talks at the conference. If anyone involved in this is going to SotM, then perhaps they want to prepare a brief talk about it?