Changeset: 52566221
DO NOT REVERT THESE CHANGES!!!!!! They have been seen on-spot, and some of the names had been shown in pics to the DWG.
Closed by Jay May
Tags
changesets_count | 4921 |
---|---|
created_by | iD 2.4.1 |
host | http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit |
imagery_used | Bing aerial imagery |
locale | pl |
source | local_knowledge |
Discussion
-
Comment from yaugenka
Jay May, my changes did not delete the previous data, whereas your reverting messed everthing up! There are now duplicate data. If you are doing reverting, do it wisely!
-
Comment from yaugenka
I do not mind if you put the previous "name:* values but please be kind to correct the mess and restore the new values I added.
-
Comment from Jay May
The values you added were wrong. The only thing called „Hudahaj” is the train station. Those villages are called „Stancyja Hudahaj” and „Maly Hudahaj” respectively. Why should I restore wrong data if I’ve been there a couple of times, the latest of which was this weekend?
-
Comment from yaugenka
Read this document from the district's government website:
http://ostrovets.grodno-region.by/uploads/files/000225_408421__selskij_ispolnitelnyj_komitet.docI moved the values from "name" tags into "alt_name" tags and put names from the document into the "name" tags. Your reverting deleted the newly added values and messed the tags up. Revert your changes or I willl have to report to DWG!
Once again, I do not mind if we keep "Станция Гудогай" and "Малый Гудогай" in the main "name" tags but the official altertive names must be defined at least in "alt_name" tags. -
Comment from Jay May
Your threat of reporting the above to the DWG is absolutely ridiculous given the fact you are the one who has been reverting my changes without/before even asking why I made them, and thus you brought more confusion. Your behavior is contrary to the good practice of OSM, which pretty much puts your actions into the vandalism category. (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism). Normally you should never revert any changes without asking its author why they did it, and you have been doing that nonstop.
If you want to put your names in alt_name, then do it yourself. However, to me it makes totally no sense. "Stancyja Hudahaj" already existed before the war ("Stacja Gudogaje") as a different village. The only village that used to be called "Hudahaj" is nowadays "Maly Hudahaj". Hence, the only one I can agree on is putting "old_name" tags "Hudahaj", "Гудогай" "Гудагай" and "Gudogaje" on that particular village.I'm afraid you guys have an *enormous* mess in your documents regarding toponyms, addresses, and so on But this is neither my fault, neither the fault of other OSM users. I keep discovering names that don't match with your papers while being in Belarus. Even worse - sometimes I notice some villages' geographical situation is exactly the opposite than in reality!
You and I have a totally different approach on OSM. You are pretty much into theory, I am into practice, and it is the reason why I keep correcting every time I drive somewhere (especially in Belarus...), and why I want the map to look as the on-ground reality while you stick to your papers and wannabe-reality that is confusing everyone around, even those you think you are defending. -
Comment from SomeoneElse
Er - I'm confused...
That document appears to be a document in Russian listing some village and settlement names in Russian. It merely confirms that these places have Russian names (which no-one disagrees with) as well as Belarusian names (which in this region I'm sure no-one disagrees with either).
Also, it lists _two_ different "Гудогай" settlements: "д.Гудогай" and "п.Гудогай". Where exactly are they? Do they correspond to "Малый" and "Станция", or something else again?
Finally, what's the licence under which the document was made available? -
Comment from yaugenka
@SomeoneElse, that is exactly the case which we were explaning to everyone in defence of Russian names in the "name" tags - almost all offical documents and maps are in Russian language.
This document is on the govenment website, govenment exacutive authority of the Ostivetskiy disctrict in this case:
http://ostrovets.grodno-region.by/ru/selsovety-ru/
"д.Гудогай" and "п.Гудогай" names correspond to "Малый" and "Станция".
You can check it on this official authority map http://map.nca.by/map.html
which is Russian as well btw.
Here is a screenshot of where to look at on that map for your convinience
https://www.awesomescreenshot.com/image/2866033/e8a8da11020db19956be7bbc301f0510 -
Comment from SomeoneElse
@yaugenka As I said, no one doubts that these places have BE and RU names. What I was asking about was your change of e.g. http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=1286803731 to lose the "Станция" part of the name (regardless of language).
Separately to that, from looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BelarusHomeLanguages2009.PNG this appears to be very much in "BE spoken at home" territory. -
Comment from yaugenka
@SomeoneElse, I'm not argueing about the use of the languigies right now. I just explained that regardless of that the document is in Russian it is an official one.
The official name of the both settlesments is "Гудогай" without the "Малый" and "Станция" parts. It is quite a common thing in Belarus when two settlements have one and the same name within one subdistrict but differ in settlement type which we put in "name:prefix" tag, "посёлок" and "деревня" in this case or "п." and "д." in short.
That was the reason why I moved "Станция Гудогай" and "Малый Гудогай" into "alt_name" tags and put "Гудогай" into the "name" tags whereas @Jay May just deleted the offical names and create tag duplicates. See how it looks right now:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7522812 -
Comment from SomeoneElse
It's perfectly possible for 2 settlements (with different names) to be part of one larger admin area - I live in a place exactly like that myself.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
Also - on the "official languages" point, there are many places in OSM where the "official" language isn't the one used by people and on signs locally, and as per http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf it's the language used by people and on signs that tends to be the one used in OSM, not some nominal "official" name or language.
Some communities have decided to do things differently - India for example has decided to use English (very much a minority language there) in the "name" tag rather than one or more of the many different languages (and language families) in use there. The Belarus community chose to use Russian in 2009 for various reasons, but while some people still agree with that some people clearly don't. -
Comment from yaugenka
Sorry, I do not quite understand why we are discussing the use of language here. How is it related to the difference between "Станция Гудогай" and "Гудогай".
-
Comment from yaugenka
You can also look up the names in the official registry of settlements at http://maps.by/searchate
Here is a screenshot from there
https://www.awesomescreenshot.com/image/2866539/17f558f07c38fa35fd106b9e0650c342 -
Comment from yaugenka
If we talk just about the use of these names, then try to search for "Станция Гудогай" or "Малый Гудогай" on the web and you will get "п. Гудогай" and "д. Гудогай" instead, like on this wiki page
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82
So the sign is the only thing which differs from all the rest. An no way @Jay May had the right to just delete the values. -
Comment from Jay May
If the values are wrong, I still don't see what I should keep them as they were.
I've corrected many mistakes on OSM where the ending was not the proper one or the name was wrong (just as in this case). I haven't seen districts of one locality signed whatsoever. For instance, Bialkiški used to be a village and is now a district of Astraviec. Only the name of the bus stop is left as it was, but entering it you see an "Astraviec" roadsign. So I seriously doubt the case is different between Mały Hudahaj and Stancyja Hudahaj.
Lately I discovered 2 villages that were place exactly the opposite on OSM as on-ground.
As I said: in Belarus, you have such an enormous mess in your papers that the only way to reflect the reality is to apply a full ground rule. Otherwise, this discussion can last for years and the map will still not be efficient because both the language displayed and the names will be wrong.
Even people within villages argue between themselves whether the right name of their locality finishes with "yzna" or "yna" (interesting, very recent article about such an issue: https://nn.by/?c=ar&i=197923 As in many places, the name of this train station has been changed from a Russian name to a Belarusian name. On the way, the toponym lost a "z" to make is "Hruleŭščyna" instead of "Hrulevščizna"). -
Comment from yaugenka
I'm greatfull for your contributions but mapping settlements from signs is not enough. The reality is constantly changing. Some settlements get annexed by larger ones or become independent or are renamed or cease to exist at all. And road signs are always going behind these changes.
For example, Bialkiški you mentioned used to be a village and has been annaxed by Astraviec some time ago and hence is marked wth "place=neighbourhood" tag now. Anaother example is hamlet Družba
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6906948 which was annaxed by town Sianno about two years ago and then become independent again about half a year ago.
Government cannot change signs instantly. So one must always double check it with the official registry. -
Comment from SomeoneElse
> So one must always double check it
> with the official registry.
I can't comment about Belarus directly but "What people refer to a place and how they classify it" and "how something is treated officially" are often very different in OSM. In most places the former gets mapped via "place" tags, the latter via "admin" levels. In many places in the world, including where I live, they don't always correspond, and people map both, separately. -
Comment from yaugenka
There is not a single settlement with "admin" tag in Belarus. All settlements are mapped with "place" tag and correspond to official registry. The prority of mapping for us is actually the law, then the registry and then the signs. Because first comes an official act (e.g. about settlement renaming) then the registry is updated and then the on-ground signs get changed phisically.
This refers to at least settlements because the registry of settlemeents is publicly available and it becomes more and more easier to find govenment acts on the web.
At the same time we are quite flexible and can keep the name from on-ground-signs in the "name" tag for some time but the official name must be present at least in the "alt_name" tags. -
Comment from Jay May
Bialkiški was marked as a neighborhood by myself :)
There is one thing I noticed in Belarus (very similar to Lithuania and to Ireland): ZIP codes seem not to be used ... Maybe it would be good to find them and map them? -
Comment from yaugenka
Bialkiški was marked as a neighborhood by myself :)
xm.. the history says it different
http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=6910214
http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=242995527 -
Comment from Jay May
Ah, rightttt. Looks like this Georgij also knows about this.
However, I am the one who created the relation between Bialkiški and Astraviec.
You are welcome to have a look if I did it the right way. -
Comment from yaugenka
Not quite. It would be correct if the area of Bialkiški was outside Astraviec. Astraviec would then consist of two separate polygons like in this example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1996913.
But Bialkiški is within Astraviec, i.e. one polygon is within another and this will cause a technical error when the area of Astraviec is calculated.
So it is actually redundent to define any relation between Bialkiški and Astraviec, because Bialkiški area is already within Astraviec one.
But if you wish you can add Bialkiški relation (not the line) to Astraviec as "subarea" as it is done for regions within country http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/59065
although we don't practice this for settlements in Belarus. -
Comment from yaugenka
I have fixed the alt_name*s of Гудогай by myself and submitted a request to our state authority to provide the name of the official act according to which the names were officially changed.
-
Comment from Jay May
O.K. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised they are not even aware that those 2 villages have slightly different names ... I'm pretty confident their answer will be very interesting to read.
-
Comment from yaugenka
Here is there answer
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bwqmq6xk-oieRzJfRThiUWNaOURLY3Q3SXFfRW82ZGJEVXUw
They say that the addressing system (which includes the registry) was formally launched in 2012 and the villages have always been named in the registry as "п. Гудогай" and "д. Гудогай" and that the names "Станция Гудогай" and "Малый Гудогай" never existed in the registry.
That means the names on the signs contradict the law and are incorrect. -
Comment from SomeoneElse
However, the law doesn't affect how we generally map stuff in OSM - it's what's on the ground that matters.
Don't just take my word for it, either - here's an answer to a similar question elsewhere: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2017-October/017990.html . -
Comment from yaugenka
I understand the on the ground rule and do not insist on changing the name right now but they may and are likely to correct the sign soon. Is anyone going to travel there from time to time to track the change for the map to stay up to date?
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
> Is anyone going to travel there from time to time to track the change for the map to stay up to date?
To be honest, it's how I keep stuff up to date where I live. Obviously (as Canadians on OSM lists point out regularly) that's less applicable to places with a significantly lower population density, such as Belarus: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.DNST?year_high_desc=false . -
Comment from Jay May
I will be there in a week or two.
About what you mentioned above on the ground rule regarding India: English has been chosen despite being a minority language because it is a language that is displayed in every roadsign, no matter the language of the province. Same for Ireland or the non-Brussels bilingual “facility communes” like Sint-Genesius-Rode, Enghien, Mouscron, Visé, etc - at least one of the two languages on roadsigns appear on the OSM main tags. Belarus is abiding by that only for commercial and street names in some towns (jekhor explained me each municipality chooses which language to display on streetsigns), but not at all regarding toponyms. As I told from the very beginning, my aim is to reflect the names exactly as they appear, no matter the language
Following the answer Yaugenka got, the mess in those names is even bigger than I thought... with name mistakes, reverted villages, etc.. I’ve seen somewhere close to Ashmiany a notification that the Poviaži village is reverted with some other one,and I corrected a lot of Belarusian names after having had a look at my dashcam videos... How do you guys manage not to get lost?... -
Comment from yaugenka
Imagine your need to make a business trip to this village and got a ticke to "п. Гудогай" - that is the name which is used in all documents and on the web. So you search for that name on the map but don't find any because on the map it is named "Станция Гудогай" instead.
-
Comment from Jay May
...and then they arrive on-spot and see „Станцыя Гудагай” written in Belarusian, which makes them really wonder what exactly is wrong with those names ... Neither the language, neither the full name correspond. „Что сделать...”
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
For info, there's a widely-used tag for the "official name" of places: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/official_name .
-
Comment from yaugenka
What is the sense of introducing one extra tag when 99.99% of names correspond to official ones and the remaing 0.01% is a neglect of the authorities who did not change the sign properly?
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
Feel free to corretc me with actual numbers, but my impression so far is that a _very high percentage_ of names in OSM in BE don't match the names on the signs. One of the arguments put forward was that they are official names.
-
Comment from yaugenka
>my impression so far is that a _very high percentage_ of names in OSM in BE don't match the names on the signs.
Can you give some examples apart from "Гудогай" where the names mismatch? -
Comment from SomeoneElse
Well, the DWG was sent lots of photographs of roadsigns and placenames in BE that in OSM are mapped in RU.
-
Comment from yaugenka
We are not talking about the use of languages here, are we? This discussion is only about the correspondence of signs to official names. Both russian and belarusian names are official.
-
Comment from Jay May
I wouldn't say "What is the sense of introducing one extra tag when 99.99% of names correspond to official ones". Given the number of wrong names I corrected on the Belarusian soil, I would say up to 80% of the names do correspond .Let alone the language question - many times the name in Russian (appearing on OSM) and the one in Belarusian (appearing on-spot) differ so much that this only confuses people, including native Russian-speakers.
About the "official_name" tag: there is also an "official_name:ru" tag. -
Comment from yaugenka
>I would say up to 80% of the names do correspond
Please provide examples of the 20%. -
Comment from Jay May
I've changed so many of them that now I won't remember everything :) Those Belarusian toponyms I had to change were mainly names with "-ызна" finishing with "-ына" in reality and the other way round (a lot of them), Янава called Янова officially (and other such names with "o" and "a" reverted). Sometimes one village has two orthographs (Валейкішкі on roadsigns / Валэйкішкі on bus stops), sometimes a word forgotten at the beginning of the name (Станцыя Ашмяны was previously shown as Ашмяны AFAIR), names finishing in "-оўцы" shown on OSM with "-аўцы". So yes, there is quite a high number of offsets between the official name, the ground name and the OSM name, which makes the map totally messy.
Anyway, this post from another DWG guy https://blog.emacsen.net/blog/2014/01/17/edit-wars-in-openstreetmap/ says it clearly: "(...)OpenStreetMap relies (...) on primary sources of contributors visiting an area and editing OSM to reflect what they see. Secondary sources are considered inferior and many OSMers use the derogatory term armchair mapping in reference to using these sources. Because of this, when a conflict arises, the person who visits the location is going to be given deference over any other source, even officially published government data.(...)"
Which means those "official_name" and "official_name:ru" tags would be more than useful in such cases. And which also means, if I understand well, ground truth prevails, which we were not abiding by so far in the case of this specific country. -
Comment from yaugenka
>Янава called Янова officially.
The first one is in Belarusian the second one is in Russaion. So you are mixing languauges here.
>names with "-ызна" finishing with "-ына" in reality
Provide exact examples please.
>Валейкішкі on roadsigns / Валэйкішкі on bus stops
Are you saying that you are putting settlement names from bus stop signs?
>names finishing in "-оўцы" shown on OSM with "-аўцы"
Provide exact examples please.
Relations (2)
Nodes (4)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |