The changeset #72729838 is primarily based on my survey of June 29, 2019, on foot. I also referred to my GPS tracks captured on May 11 and February 16.

Satellite Imagery Offset

• Bing (2019): -0.16; 1.55

Notes

1. The road of way 139699909 needs to be confirmed. I guess it doesn’t exist as it looks a private property.
2. I reversed the positions of some nodes (2744001342, 2744001328, and 2744001278) on Kumagaya-Gyoda city border (way 269108227) as it looks some mappers mistakenly dragged them with other map objects.

On May 24, 2019, the Ministry of Public Works and Communications (MOPC) of the Republic of Paraguay published Resolution No. 1090/19, which “Categorizes and Classifies National Routes”, whose last update was made in the year 1,962.

Within the framework of Law No. 5552/2016, 10 new national routes were created and the routes of historical routes were redefined as national routes No. 2 and No. 7, as well as the criteria for references as PYnn .

This decision led to the organization of a task with the OpenStreetMap Community of Paraguay, and on the OSM-Py Telegram channel the criteria for the designation and classification of existing roads that became part of the road network were discussed and agreed upon of national routes.

Based on the maps published by the MOPC (https://www.mopc.gov.py/mopcweb/index.php/download_file/view_inline/3198), during the months of July and August 2019, members of the communities of OSM Paraguay and OSM Argentina, intervened the map by editing and re-labeling the existing ways to adapt it to Resolution No. 1090/19.

Thanks to the work and dedication of a group of committed users, after an arduous task, the map of the Republic of Paraguay is displayed in OSM as established by the Law and the relevant Resolution.

“In the Eastern Region of the country, 3,494 km of national routes now have 5,502 km of paved routes, while the Paraguayan Chaco adds 4 more routes to its road heritage, totaling 3,554 km, which bet on the development of the entire Western Region. ”(https://www.mopc.gov.py/mopcweb/index.php/actualizacion-de-la-red-vial-de-rutas-nacionales-del-paraguay)

The new map of national routes of Paraguay can be seen here: http://u.osmfr.org/m/356487/ and the descriptive information, as well as all the relations are in the OSM wiki: osm.wiki/ES:Paraguay#.28Mapa_de_Reclasificaci.C3.B3n_2019.29

The changeset #72482652 is based on my survey of July 14, 2019, on foot.

Satellite Imagery Offset

• Maxar Standard Imagery (Beta): 2.32;-5.37

Notes

1. I removed a house (way 704173228) after my survey confirmed it was demolished.

The changeset #72213609 is based on my survey of June 29, 2019, on foot.

Avoid the crowds and tripadvisor, a vacation is only an adventure if you find the escape velocity of your known universe and reach it, and you’ll find outside that, another version of yourself that just might follow you home.

We had seen the soaring ceilings of the Hagia Sofia, I was already used to the chingchonglinglongs from shopkeepers in the Grand Bazaar, we went to the Blue Mosque on a day it was closed to non-believers, we’d eaten homemade sigarabörek by her aunt for dinner, we’d taken the ferry to the tip of the Asian continent… It was day 3 of Istanbul, and my best friend had a family engagement that night. I wasn’t brave enough to venture back to the Asian side to visit a nightclub on my own, and had been advised against going out by myself anyway.

What else do you do in a big, unknown city on a Friday night?

… See full entry

Changeset #:73602495 Adjusting the newly created road data in OSM to better reflect the actual road. Without multiple GPS traces this would be impossible using aerial map data since the road is heavily covered by foliage. Also added minor roads in the area and updated POI names based on local knowledge.

The changeset #72188988 is based on my survey of June 23, 2019, on foot.

Satellite Imagery Offsets

• Bing (2019): -0.60; 3.71 in Shinkawa based on my GPS tracks, -1.20; 2.52 at Kuge Elementary School and its neighborhood, -0.16; 1.55 adjusted to GSImaps/ort and applied to a house along Motoarakawa-dori Street north of the elementary school
• Maxar Standard Imagery (Beta): 0.45;-7.91 at Kuge Elementary School and its neighborhood
• GSImaps/ort: 1.64; 0.75 in Shinkawa based on my GPS tracks, 2.69; 1.49 at Kumagaya Musashino Golf Center
• GSImaps/gazo4 (captured from 1988 to 1990): 2.09; 5.37 at Kumagaya Musashino Golf Center

Notes

1. I primarily referred to Bing imagery more than GSImaps/ort as Bing looks more recent than GSImaps/ort.
2. Does a farm road (way 703982043) still exist? **
3. Bushes hampered me from going forward on a farm road (way 440901657) beyond the node 6610395634. **
4. Bushes hampered me from going forward on a farm road (way 139699855) beyond the node 1531054085. **
5. Does a road (ways 139700288 and 139700774) still exist? **
6. The boundaries of Kumagaya Musashino Golf Center on the side of Arakawa River are not clear. However, GSImaps/gazo4 (captured from 1988 and 1990) suggests what appear to be hedges.
7. A fence (between the nodes 6535566259 and 6535566260 of the way 695996919) has no bend.
8. Boundaries between residential areas and rice fields in the southeast of Kuge Elementary School are not clear.

** I need a survey again especially in winter when bushes are expected to disappear.

Words

• Shinkawa … 新川
• Kuge Elementary School … 久下小学校
• Motoarakawa-dori Street … 元荒川通り
• Kumagaya Musashino Golf Center … 熊谷武蔵野ゴルフセンター
• Arakawa River … 荒川

My Pista ng Mapa 2019 Experience

I don’t know where to start in my Pista ng Mapa 2019 experience because everything was amazing and unforgettable, but I’ll start from the very beginning of my journey.

I was invited to Pista ng Mapa 2019 by my mentor. At that time, we just finished our CWTS++ session from our school. Us volunteers and with my mentor were just having our lunch and discussion from the session. At the end of the discussion, he mentioned to us that we should apply a scholarship for Pista ng Mapa 2019. I was interested about the conference and the experience that I will be gaining. As I got home, I applied for a scholarship to Pista ng Mapa 2019. (Spoiler Alert) At that moment, I didn’t know that my application will be accepted. Days went passed by, and shortly I received an email. But at that time I didn’t check on my email, so I wasn’t notified. A day after the email was sent, I was notified by my peer that we were both shortlisted in the scholarship. I was shocked and hoping to get the scholarship. Fast forward through time and I was in tears of joy because I was accepted.

2 weeks before the conference, I was nervous and excited at the same time. As I prepare myself for the conference, I practiced my public speaking skills and I prepared my knowledge to be shared in Dumaguete.

Days went passed by and fast forward to my first flight experience. I consider this experience as one of the memorable, because it is a starting point for my adulthood experience. As I arrived in the airport, it is time for me and my peer to travel through air for the first time. Fast forward to Dumaguete, landing was bumpy and finally we have landed safely.

Now here’s another memorable experience, when we were going to our accommodation. Long story short, we got lost but we found the location safely like after 30 minutes of finding it with some help online. I’ll consider it as a part of my being a mapper experience.

… See full entry

For my first time in OSM, I have done some edits in the area while going away from the city since the roads are non existent in OSM. References are GPS traces and aerial map views. Will be frequently travelling to country roads and recording GPS traces.

The changeset #71981822 is primarily based on my survey on foot on June 22, 2019.

Satellite Imagery Offsets

• Bing (2019): -0.16; 1.55 in Kuge 1-Chome to adjust to GSImaps/ort, -1.20; 2.52 primarily in Kuge around Tennis Club Yoshioka

Notes

1. Only two nodes (6594523342 and 1531054547) are sufficient to draw a slope (way 139699847) inside the embankment.
2. Only three nodes (4224678050, 4555818441, and 4224678043) are primarily sufficient to draw a slope (way 422732760).
3. The position of node 4138726640 is still unclear. I need more GPS data to accurately locate it.
4. I removed a slope (way 139486362) inside the embankment after my survey on July 7.
5. I used the tag “barrier=kerb” for the first time on a trial basis between nodes 1503600217 and 6594523209 on a road (way 27481282). The shapes of cuts at road crossings are temporary.
6. I removed a house (way 359007036) after my survey on July 7 confirmed it was demolished.

Word

• Kuge … 久下

The changeset #71523426 is primarily based on my survey on foot on June 16, 2019.

Satellite Imagery Offsets

• Bing (2019): -0.30; 1.18 in Kuge 1-Chome, 0.89; 1.92 inside the embankment based on my GPS tracks

I’ve noticed that Bing imagery looks more recent than GSImaps/ort.

Notes

1. The geometry of a wall (way 699155219) on the side of Motoarakawa River is uncertain.
2. Only three nodes (5810198348, 6535565861, and 5810198347) are sufficient to draw a slope (way 699155176).
3. Bushes hampered me from going forward on a farm road (way 699155177) beyond the node 6565472849. **
4. Bushes prevented me from confirming farm roads (ways 699155178 and 440901659). **
5. Bushes hampered me from going forward on a farm road (way 562347565) beyond the node 6565472821 from the node 6565472823. **

** I need a survey again especially in winter when the bushes are expected to disappear.

Words

• Kuge … 久下
• Motoarakawa River … 元荒川

The changeset #71515557 is based on my survey on foot on June 15, 2019.

The changeset #71284545 is primarily based on my survey on foot on June 8 and 9, 2019.

Satellite Imagery Offset

• GSImaps/ort: 1.64; 0.75 inside the embankment based on my GPS tracks

Notes

1. Bushes hampered me from going forward on a farm road (way 139699872) beyond the node 1531054232 from the node 1531054132. **
2. It’s roughly less than 30 meters from the end (node 6549781078) of a farm road (way 697401612) to Kumagaya Musashino Golf Center.
3. Bushes hampered me from going forward on a farm road (way 440901658) beyond the node 6549781082 from the node 1531054272. **

** I need a survey especially in winter when bushes are expected to disappear.

We the Committee for communication, fundraising, program scholarship met on 19 f August, 2019 through mumble and finalized about the SoTM conference at Abidjan.

The changeset #71077188 is primarily based on my survey on foot on June 2, 2019.

Satellite Imagery Offsets

• Bing (2019): -0.75; 1.94 basically on the ground (This area is relatively flat), 2.08;-2.39 at the top of the embankment (My experience with GPS suggests the height is roughly 7 meters)
• GSImaps/ort: 1.64; 0.75 inside the embankment based on my GPS tracks

Notes

1. Does a section (between nodes 1531055593 and 5421471846) of a farm road (way 139700776) exist? **
2. Have most of the sections of a farm road (ways 695996855 and 139486524) disappeared? **

** I need a survey especially in winter when bushes are expected to disappear.

This is a gist of all the work that was done during the summer of 2019 under Google Summer Of Code (GSOC) to further improve the PT Assistant plugin which assists mappers in mapping Public Transport systems as well as Bicycle and hiking itineraries.

Aim of the Project

To further improve the plugin in a way that it helps mappers in mapping public transport systems as well as Bicycle itineraries with ease and a lot of further changes to make the plugin more helpful and flexible to the mapper. The assistant became more user-friendly and should act as a true assistant with smarter decision-making capabilities.

End Results

The plugin is now much more capable, processing the data in the background and presenting the result to enable the mappers to make decisions especially with new features like routing helper for bicycle, the extended data model for public transport, and some new key functions in old routing helper. All the major achievements of this summer have been listed below :

Extending routing helper for bicycles

Previous Routing Helper was dedicated to public transport so my task was to extend it further for Bicycles. As Bicycle follows the original mapping model for route relations, they are different than the route relations for public transport. Bicycle routes contain “forward” and backward roles on its ways to separate branches were traversing the route in one direction differs from the route in the opposite direction. The order of the member ways is different than pt-routes. So the basic idea of the router was the same first it starts from the beginning of the route and checks for gaps in the route and at every step, it checks for the validity of the current traversing way and if it finds something wrong it shows users options to fix that.

… See full entry

The creek

Is anyone else going to the Chaos Communications Camp next week? Does anyone know what, if any, OSM stuff will be going on. I’ll be there, but I’ve been very bad with research!

If you wanna meet up, gimmie a shout. 🙂

I’m now taking a look on Ichi-Sansho-Joho data from MLIT, Japan. This is quite powerful dataset about place name, and could be used as OpenStreetMap edits. (include imports, although it is not fully activated)

osm.wiki/JA:MLIT_ISJ

Seeing Japanese place/address name sample structure, some errors might be contained. This is a note for further works.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eAE72mjCLoJVGZo5qRhCYK22UxVQ8bpbQSU9ZLHq40o/edit#gid=0

• “11”,”埼玉県”,”11234”,”八潮市”,”112340013002”,”大字二丁目”,”35.821729”,”139.846276”,”0”,”3”

-> Code 3 could be error. Code 1 would be correct. This is quarter named “大字二丁目”. Despite of “丁目” is included.

• “27”,”大阪府”,”27145”,”堺市南区”,”271450017000”,”竹城台四丁”,”34.498107”,”135.500217”,”0”,”1”
• “27”,”大阪府”,”27145”,”堺市南区”,”271450035000”,”竹城台二丁”,”34.498169”,”135.505486”,”0”,”1”
• “27”,”大阪府”,”27145”,”堺市南区”,”271450074000”,”竹城台三丁”,”34.493790”,”135.503225”,”0”,”1”
• “27”,”大阪府”,”27145”,”堺市南区”,”271450075000”,”竹城台一丁”,”34.500963”,”135.510525”,”0”,”1”

-> Probably original structure is correct, but “n丁” should be devided in the case of use for OSM. Those are Code 1 column, but should be treated as variant of Code 3.

• “04”,”宮城県”,”04103”,”仙台市若林区”,”041030090000”,”蒲町東”,”38.245498”,”140.932557”,”0”,”3”
• “07”,”福島県”,”07207”,”須賀川市”,”072070142000”,”北山寺町”,”37.30542”,”140.364113”,”0”,”3”
• “07”,”福島県”,”07207”,”須賀川市”,”072070143000”,”西山寺町”,”37.303127”,”140.358357”,”0”,”3”
• “07”,”福島県”,”07207”,”須賀川市”,”072070144000”,”山寺町”,”37.302309”,”140.364716”,”0”,”3”

-> Code 3 might be error. I guess those lines should be Code 2.

And Code 3 lines (丁目) should be divided into 2 nodes. (quarter (町名) and neighbourhood (丁目).) Some quarter might be duplicated to Code 1 lines.

And it seems “釧路市昭和”（大字, quarter）and “釧路市昭和町” are same district, but need more check if it is correct.

To be fair, we were validating. We validated 5% of the tasks and invalidated 4%. So we went over 9% of the tasks. In 2 hours. With the group of 5 people. And one of us was validating for the first time.

The point is that the validation is not fixing. The validation is approving.

I would like to note our small contribution from Prague. Inspired by London Missing Maps mappers, we started small mapathons this summer. These mapathons are for advanced mappers, we use JOSM, and this time, it was a validation time. I went over multiple sources describing how to validate. I used OSM wiki as a primary source. Then LearnOSM, MissingMaps, and browsed multiple links pointed out by these sources. I attended HOT validation training webinar. I found out these pieces of information bloated, so I stripped them and picked up what I consider helpful.

There are fewer validators than mappers. If validators want to keep up with mappers, they need to validate faster than the mappers are mapping.

Our group was validating buildings with the following workflow:

• Find out if you are going to invalidate task, usually because of not-orthogonalized buildings, missing buildings, lousy geometry, or buildings mapped with bad imagery.

• Orthogonalize all the buildings with 4 nodes:

  • Ctrl + F and find buildings nodes:4 inview.
  • Press Q.

• Upload changes and invalidate task with the comment why.

Of course, if there is no problem and everything is mapped as described in instructions, just browse the square and find out if everything is really ok. MarkSeen plugin can help here. If there is one building with wrong dimensions or bad rotation, fix it (Utilsplugin2 and X for resizing help here a lot). If you find out the second one, invalidate. Validating is approving, remember?

… See full entry