The following Github issue seems to have a bit more context and background information on that topic: https://github.com/fossgis/osmdata/issues/7

Take a close look at the following answer: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/20531/overpass-ql-nodes-and-ways-in-area

I got some feedback that https://s3-ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com/overpass-db-ap-northeast-1/augmented-diffs/ is no longer being updated since quite some time. Is this a known issue? Is the URL still correct?

You can ask a moderator to hide it.

Query was the second one “huts, shelters, shalets, … “. In your query you use “nwr” which returns nodes, ways, and relations. However, for the ways, you only receive the “node ids”, not the actual nodes with lat/lon details.

togpx cannot create anything meaningful in this case, as there’s simply no geoemtry available. Please compare:

• way(34996405)[tourism=chalet];out;
• way(34996405)[tourism=chalet];out center;

I believe one of your example queries does not return any geometry information for ways, i.e. you’re probably missing out a few thousand objects. Maybe try this one here: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/QHD

Needless to say that this rather senior mapper is also an administrator of the OpenStreetMapOrg Telegram group. I hope that’s not the new way of leading by example.

Yes, see osm.wiki/Overpass_API/Overpass_QL#Times_and_Divided

You can probably generate the same output with a single Overpass query without any external shell script. Check out osm.wiki/Overpass_API/Overpass_API_by_Example#Wiki_table_generator_.28since_0.7.54.29 for some ideas.

There’s really no need to fork the repository on your own. Just go to https://github.com/switch2osm/switch2osm.github.io, locate the file you want to change, and hit the edit (“pencil”) icon. Github will automatically fork the repository for you in the background and guide you through the pull request process without much hassle. It’s really that simple.

They indicated elsewhere (obviously without disclosing any details) that bad actors outside of OSM are scraping imagery. impacting their service.

This HOT mapathon stuff mentioned earlier on is pretty much fake news, after all.

Just adding a pointer to previous work by Roland on API keys: https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/2145

Thanks for sharing your ideas. No doubt, the current ‘minimalistic style’ osm.org has some advantages, which tend to be forgotten in this kind of discussion. Most importantly, the whole OSM ecosystem can evolve at a much higher speed compared to a more centralized model: you get the API and the data, now go ahead and create some cool stuff with it.

Bringing everything on osm.org might further increase the workload on OWG+sysadmins to a point where it may be no longer manageable. It adds lots of coordination effort, which even further reduces available time to do something productive. In the long run, I see a significant maintenance burden for every new feature being added.

I do believe it is essential to evolve some of the features, in particular social and community support. However, do it one step at a time, with a clear focus (!) on something that is both achievable and adds value to the osm community. We shouldn’t try to compete in areas where it doesn’t make sense (hosting images, yet another chat or video tool,…).

I agree with others, it would be good to have some form of consensus about the target audience we want to address on osm.org.

I don’t really know why you would want to add random statistics about OSM to wikidata, those seem fairly random at best. I mean I’m pretty sure there some sites out there crunching OSM planet files and producing some stats on a regular basis. If anyone wants to see those numbers, I would never head for Wikidata and always consult the real source.

by the way, here’s the query I used: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/OhF

According to Overpass API, there’s a total of 149813 highway=path ways with a total length of 52521 km in Sweden.

No, it definitely not v2.15. Take a look at https://preview.ideditor.com/release which hosts v2.16 and see how they differ. Did you notice that http://id.openstreetmap.fr/ is in fact based on the master branch, and looks very much like https://preview.ideditor.com/master. The master branch is where the future development for v3 happens. There’s a dedicated branch for v2.15, though.

Let us stop using that “official” version of iD today, and switch to the community version of iD maintained by Frédéric Rodrigo (see also his tweet).

I hope you’re aware that http://id.openstreetmap.fr/ was built by patching a still unreleased iD v3 version, and modifying some of its JSON configuration settings. It reflects some intermediate development state of a future iD version, where hundreds of changes and fixes have been contributed in the meantime. Then, https://github.com/frodrigo/iD doesn’t provide any way to file any issues on its own. Needless to say that this overall approach won’t fly.

Also, das Problem hier war ein zusätzliches Leerzeichen zwischen dem […] und dem (link) : [...] (link) - der alte Parser hat das noch toleriert, beim neuen treten die bekannten Effekte auf. TomH hat jetzt dankenswerterweise einen Blog post manuell korrigiert: osm.org/user/MKnight/diary/40702

Vielleicht kannst du ja nochmal einen Blick auf deine anderen Blog posts werfen und dort selbst die Links geradeziehen.

Ich habe jetzt einen Kommentar zum ursprünglichen Pull Request ergänzt: https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/2111#issuecomment-457824097