Suggestion for JOSM

[Shalabh-3]

I have been using JOSM for the last 2-3 months for making changes to OSM. A practical issue I see using JOSM is it shows the GPS trails as light red lines and then the user needs to draw nodes on those trails. Drawing these individual nodes, taking care that each curve on the road is taken care of by drawing multiple nodes (I have been mapping mountain roads primarily) is quite a tedious task.

Given my limited understanding of mapping and even more limited understanding of computing, I think it would be better if JOSM assumed the trails to be correct and drew nodes on it on its own. The user could then delete whatever he feels is irrelevant or not needed and make changes wherever necessary. The downside to this would be repeat roads getting drawn if users forget to delete tracks for a road which is already on OSM.

I will leave this open to discussion but I thought it better to bring this to everybody's notice, so JOSM can be made more user friendly.

Regards,
Shalabh

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[John Smith-131]

2009/11/2 Shalabh <shalabh.w@...>:
> I will leave this open to discussion but I thought it better to bring this
> to everybody's notice, so JOSM can be made more user friendly.

You can already convert a GPX layer to a OSM layer and then upload the
results, just right click on the layer, however it can be very tedious
to remove points if they are once a second and all points are imported
etc.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Dan Homerick]

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:56 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...> wrote:

You can already convert a GPX layer to a OSM layer and then upload the
results, just right click on the layer, however it can be very tedious
to remove points if they are once a second and all points are imported
etc.

 Once the GPX layer is converted to an OSM layer, you can run "Simplify Way" on it to reduce the number of points to a reasonable number and frequency. It's available via the Tools menu once you have installed the 'utilsplugin' plugin.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[John Smith-131]

2009/11/2 Dan Homerick <danhomerick@...>:

> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:56 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> You can already convert a GPX layer to a OSM layer and then upload the
>> results, just right click on the layer, however it can be very tedious
>> to remove points if they are once a second and all points are imported
>> etc.
>
>  Once the GPX layer is converted to an OSM layer, you can run "Simplify Way"
> on it to reduce the number of points to a reasonable number and frequency.
> It's available via the Tools menu once you have installed the 'utilsplugin'
> plugin.

It isn't aggresive enough to cope with most GPX files I've tried it on...

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Nop-4]

Hi!

Shalabh schrieb:
> Given my limited understanding of mapping and even more limited
> understanding of computing, I think it would be better if JOSM assumed
> the trails to be correct and drew nodes on it on its own.

This is possible combining several features. However, it is a bad idea,
most ways added this way are in horrible state and need correction.

- way too many nodes. The API does not return more than 50000 nodes in
one request, so many tracks with 1500 nodes each quickly make it
impossible to download a sizable area
- the GPs is inaccurate. If you just stupidly add the track, all the
mismeasurements are added to the DB. While drawing the way, you can
smooth out the obvious zigzags of errors and deviations of known bad
reception. Also, as the distance of nodes (usually 1m) is way smaller
than the basic error of the GPS, it makes no sense to add this sort of
misleading pseudo-accuracy
- those ways are then unconnected to all other ways. It is very
difficult and tedious to create the proper connections
- most people who take this "easy way" don't connect and simplify the
way properly, you will often find ways that are simply created over
existing, manually edited versions of the same way.

So in practice this doesn't work out. If you process your track
properly, it is quite some work either way, but using the track directly
encourages quick and sloppy adding of bad geometry.

It has been suggested several times, that the possibility to do this
indirectly be removed from JOSM altogether and having corrected many bad
direct uploads I am rather in favour of this.

bye
        Nop

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Shalabh-3]

Hi Nop, thanks for your email. I take your point, it would be difficult to delete and then we would be purely depending on the mapper's diligence. So yeah, I think I would rather use the suggestions given by Dan than advocate an auto track feature.

Regards,
Shalabh

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Nop <ekkehart@...> wrote:

Hi!

Shalabh schrieb:

Given my limited understanding of mapping and even more limited understanding of computing, I think it would be better if JOSM assumed the trails to be correct and drew nodes on it on its own.

This is possible combining several features. However, it is a bad idea, most ways added this way are in horrible state and need correction.

- way too many nodes. The API does not return more than 50000 nodes in one request, so many tracks with 1500 nodes each quickly make it impossible to download a sizable area
- the GPs is inaccurate. If you just stupidly add the track, all the mismeasurements are added to the DB. While drawing the way, you can smooth out the obvious zigzags of errors and deviations of known bad reception. Also, as the distance of nodes (usually 1m) is way smaller than the basic error of the GPS, it makes no sense to add this sort of misleading pseudo-accuracy
- those ways are then unconnected to all other ways. It is very difficult and tedious to create the proper connections
- most people who take this "easy way" don't connect and simplify the way properly, you will often find ways that are simply created over existing, manually edited versions of the same way.

So in practice this doesn't work out. If you process your track properly, it is quite some work either way, but using the track directly encourages quick and sloppy adding of bad geometry.

It has been suggested several times, that the possibility to do this indirectly be removed from JOSM altogether and having corrected many bad direct uploads I am rather in favour of this.

bye
       Nop

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Mike Harris-10]

Why not (a) convert the GPX layer to a data layer and then (b) use the
simplify way tool from the JOSM plugin?

Mike Harris
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Smith [mailto:deltafoxtrot256@...]
> Sent: 02 November 2009 06:57
> To: Shalabh
> Cc: talk@...
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Suggestion for JOSM
>
> 2009/11/2 Shalabh <shalabh.w@...>:
> > I will leave this open to discussion but I thought it
> better to bring
> > this to everybody's notice, so JOSM can be made more user friendly.
>
> You can already convert a GPX layer to a OSM layer and then
> upload the results, just right click on the layer, however it
> can be very tedious to remove points if they are once a
> second and all points are imported etc.
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[SLXViper]

John Smith wrote:

> 2009/11/2 Dan Homerick <danhomerick@...>:
>  
>> Once the GPX layer is converted to an OSM layer, you can run
>> "Simplify Way"
>> on it to reduce the number of points to a reasonable number and frequency.
>> It's available via the Tools menu once you have installed the 'utilsplugin'
>> plugin.
>>    
>
> It isn't aggresive enough to cope with most GPX files I've tried it on...
>  

This can be solved by adjusting the setting "simplify-way.max-error".

regards

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Michael Barabanov]

Also, a free-hand drawing mode (e.g. press-down left mouse button and
drag) in JOSM would go a long way towards faster tracing. Clicking to
add one point at a time is pretty slow.

Michael.

On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 01:18:46PM +0530, Shalabh (shalabh.w@...) wrote:

> Hi Nop, thanks for your email. I take your point, it would be difficult to
> delete and then we would be purely depending on the mapper's diligence. So
> yeah, I think I would rather use the suggestions given by Dan than advocate
> an auto track feature.
>
> Regards,
> Shalabh
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Nop <ekkehart@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Shalabh schrieb:
> >
> >  Given my limited understanding of mapping and even more limited
> >> understanding of computing, I think it would be better if JOSM assumed the
> >> trails to be correct and drew nodes on it on its own.
> >>
> >
> > This is possible combining several features. However, it is a bad idea,
> > most ways added this way are in horrible state and need correction.
> >
> > - way too many nodes. The API does not return more than 50000 nodes in one
> > request, so many tracks with 1500 nodes each quickly make it impossible to
> > download a sizable area
> > - the GPs is inaccurate. If you just stupidly add the track, all the
> > mismeasurements are added to the DB. While drawing the way, you can smooth
> > out the obvious zigzags of errors and deviations of known bad reception.
> > Also, as the distance of nodes (usually 1m) is way smaller than the basic
> > error of the GPS, it makes no sense to add this sort of misleading
> > pseudo-accuracy
> > - those ways are then unconnected to all other ways. It is very difficult
> > and tedious to create the proper connections
> > - most people who take this "easy way" don't connect and simplify the way
> > properly, you will often find ways that are simply created over existing,
> > manually edited versions of the same way.
> >
> > So in practice this doesn't work out. If you process your track properly,
> > it is quite some work either way, but using the track directly encourages
> > quick and sloppy adding of bad geometry.
> >
> > It has been suggested several times, that the possibility to do this
> > indirectly be removed from JOSM altogether and having corrected many bad
> > direct uploads I am rather in favour of this.
> >
> > bye
> >        Nop
> >

> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk@...
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[John Smith-131]

2009/11/3 Michael Barabanov <michael.barabanov@...>:
> Also, a free-hand drawing mode (e.g. press-down left mouse button and
> drag) in JOSM would go a long way towards faster tracing. Clicking to
> add one point at a time is pretty slow.

+1

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/11/3 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>

2009/11/3 Michael Barabanov <michael.barabanov@...>:

> Also, a free-hand drawing mode (e.g. press-down left mouse button and
> drag) in JOSM would go a long way towards faster tracing. Clicking to
> add one point at a time is pretty slow.

+1

-1; I doubt it would be of any help at all. I'm drawing a lot in vector-programms (professionally) and never using those free-hand-modes, as you can't draw exactly with a mouse (at least I can't, or if I do I'll have to adjust 80% of the controll points manually afterwards, so there is no gain in time). Well, if you got a digitizer it might be useful. If there are very few tracks in the area you are drawing in, it might also be useful if there was a snap to gpx-point-mode, but still I think that's too many ifs. (of course: feel free to develop a solution and convince me of the opposite).

cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[John Smith-131]

2009/11/3 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@...>:

>
>
> 2009/11/3 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>
>>
>> 2009/11/3 Michael Barabanov <michael.barabanov@...>:
>> > Also, a free-hand drawing mode (e.g. press-down left mouse button and
>> > drag) in JOSM would go a long way towards faster tracing. Clicking to
>> > add one point at a time is pretty slow.
>>
>> +1
>
> -1; I doubt it would be of any help at all. I'm drawing a lot in
> vector-programms (professionally) and never using those free-hand-modes, as
> you can't draw exactly with a mouse (at least I can't, or if I do I'll have
> to adjust 80% of the controll points manually afterwards, so there is no
> gain in time). Well, if you got a digitizer it might be useful. If there are
> very few tracks in the area you are drawing in, it might also be useful if
> there was a snap to gpx-point-mode, but still I think that's too many ifs.
> (of course: feel free to develop a solution and convince me of the
> opposite).

Gimp lets you plot freehand or if you hold shift will do a straight
line, I'm sure there is a number of modifiers that would make a free
hand mode useful...

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/11/3 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>

Gimp lets you plot freehand or if you hold shift will do a straight
line, I'm sure there is a number of modifiers that would make a free
hand mode useful...

Gimp is a bitmap-based-programm. As I pointed out: nearly all vector-based programms offer freehand-modes (Adobe Illustrator, Ex-Macromedia Freehand, Flash, ...) but they are not useful when it comes to precise drawing.

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[John Smith-131]

2009/11/3 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@...>:

>
>
> 2009/11/3 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>
>>
>> Gimp lets you plot freehand or if you hold shift will do a straight
>> line, I'm sure there is a number of modifiers that would make a free
>> hand mode useful...
>
> Gimp is a bitmap-based-programm. As I pointed out: nearly all vector-based
> programms offer freehand-modes (Adobe Illustrator, Ex-Macromedia Freehand,
> Flash, ...) but they are not useful when it comes to precise drawing.

It doesn't matter if it's vector or raster, we're essentially talking
about plotting points and having those points joined by a line/way,
the point is it's just a data entry method, and as I said even gimp
can draw a precise line.

If you don't want to use such a features that's your pejorative, there
is plenty of features I don't use in JOSM, but other people would like
the option of being able to do this.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Michael Barabanov
<michael.barabanov@...> wrote:
> Also, a free-hand drawing mode (e.g. press-down left mouse button and
> drag) in JOSM would go a long way towards faster tracing. Clicking to
> add one point at a time is pretty slow.

To everyone in this thread: If you have feature suggestions for JOSM
please file them *on the JOSM bugtracker* at
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/newticket and not here.

The JOSM developers are very good at responding to feature requests,
so if you have minor nits or enhancement suggestions please note them
somewhere where they might actually make a difference.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[John F. Eldredge]

Bitmapped images don't scale well.  When you zoom in, the pixels get larger, rather than more pixels being added.  For purposes of map-making, it seems like a vector-based system would work better.

--
John F. Eldredge -- john@...
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

-----Original Message-----
From: John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:51:38
To: <mk@...>
Cc: <talk@...>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Suggestion for JOSM

2009/11/3 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@...>:

>
>
> 2009/11/3 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256@...>
>>
>> Gimp lets you plot freehand or if you hold shift will do a straight
>> line, I'm sure there is a number of modifiers that would make a free
>> hand mode useful...
>
> Gimp is a bitmap-based-programm. As I pointed out: nearly all vector-based
> programms offer freehand-modes (Adobe Illustrator, Ex-Macromedia Freehand,
> Flash, ...) but they are not useful when it comes to precise drawing.

It doesn't matter if it's vector or raster, we're essentially talking
about plotting points and having those points joined by a line/way,
the point is it's just a data entry method, and as I said even gimp
can draw a precise line.

If you don't want to use such a features that's your pejorative, there
is plenty of features I don't use in JOSM, but other people would like
the option of being able to do this.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Russ Nelson]

John Smith writes:
 > If you don't want to use such a features that's your pejorative, there
 > is plenty of features I don't use in JOSM, but other people would like
 > the option of being able to do this.

Plugin.

--
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | [phone]    
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog      

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk