We’re excited about your interest in MapMetrics. If you have any further related questions but cannot reach Steve through this forum, you can send your inquiries directly to his team at innovationteam@groups.tomtom.com.
Coming back to the projects that we originally proposed, I see that your community has already solved many of the issues in the non-closed polygon and charging station tag challenges. Thank you for that! We are happy to be working on the map together with you, and look forward to possible future collaborations.
Without giving my opinion on some alternatives mentioned, and without wanting to start a discussion on this either, I do understand why sharing the private GPS traces publicly is avoided. Imagine seeing a GPS trace starting at your married neighbors house and ending at the parking lot of a brothel ;). Sharing with(in) a company vs. the big public is a big difference.
Oh it goes without saying that we don’t want those. All data should be anonymized and stripped of identifying attributes. With heat maps it’s still possible that in areas with not quite as much traffic you can see that there is exactly one line repeatedly going from the house of a well-known vegan influencer to the butcher shop a block over, but it doesn’t tell you more than that, and as a user of TomTom’s services you’ve already opted in to agreeing to exactly that level of disclosure — i.e., you’ve signed away your expectation of privacy via their terms of use and the privacy policy.
TomTom pretending that this is about privacy is a bit of a red flag for me, because they explicitly tell their users upfront not to expect that level of privacy. This is more likely than not about preventing competitors from gaining access to such data. I’d love to be proven wrong though.
Besides, there are all sorts of tricks that could be employed by Steve’s team; like limiting the traces exposed to areas that lack ways on OSM, or only showing traces for red tiles. Both would enable mappers to improve those areas while limiting the exposure of TomTom’s corporate assets.
If you look on the “DKK Kadastralegrens V2” (enable layer OSM OK)
Then you see yellow “DKK Kadastralegrens” lines, these are recently changed ownership.
The railway levelcrossing is going to be changed. New path to the left then under the raillwaybridge. http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/~allroads/NLOSMOK/OSMOKNL.html#map=18.60/53.1732/5.6001/0
yellow: wfs tag “typeGrensWaarde = Voorlopig” (provisory) after measured in “definitief” definitive.
This tag is a indication for changes.
Probably, likely, planning people or builders investigate this situation are going to that spot.
But this is only one red tile, speeding moped on cycleway past the building then across railwaycrossing? There are no red tiles futher on, the traces should be ongoing. Then I thought that is not the case.
Are these planning/construction people taking the farmers track left of the ditch to be more close the railway to do there job?
Or a planning/construction quad to some point.
The people who live in the house can use a moped, daily and likely they have a permit to use the cycleway G13, for them “not illegal”, then not past the building.
A partly trace would be handsome to make more reliable assumption.
Is the trace ongoing or a turn around at some point?
It is only one red tile.
Looks like it is not a ongoing activity on the cycleway.
Not ongoing speeding mopeds, speed pedelecs.
Good research, so again construction traffic and/or mopeds.
cyclists are likely not the problem, as MapMetrics is filtering on speed it are mopeds that are the problem.
I know some numbers for a straight solitary cyclepath and there the average speed of mopeds is ~45 km/h with 63 km/h being the V85, speed is not the way to filter out two-wheelers.
I had a look at OSM202110 and apart from mopeds, also water is a problem:
Cyclepaths could perhaps be solved by using two routers, one for cars and one for cyclists. As Steve said, “we route right now for cars” hence if you try to match a bike GPS trace to a graph maintained by a router for cars, you will get a red tile since highly probable transitions for cars are not as probable for bikes and vice versa. If a GPS trace has a higher confidence match with the bicycle router, discard the trace and do not publish it to MapMetrics.
The impact of construction traffic could be reduced by looking at the amount of time covered by the trace. TomTom also has traffic data so knows what the average length of a traffic jam is in a certain area, if the trace exceeds this amount it is likely construction traffic working a day shift on a construction site.
Water can be solved by excluding traces that are (partly) contained by water polygons.
Could be solved by implementing another router that relaxes certain constraints. Some emergency services in NL use TomTom devices and will obviously break the law if needed. If the trace matches the graph maintained by a relaxed-constraint-car-router, the trace does at least not cover a missing road → perhaps such traces could be given a yellow tile, while missing roads can be assigned a red tile in MapMetrics?
We agree that an open discussion is ideal and are looking into providing a centralized MapMetrics forum within OSM so that editors in all of the countries that MapMetrics covers can benefit from Q&A. We will be sure to keep you posted.
Could you ping Steve to answer the questions we’ve raised regarding access to the (anonymized and aggregated) data (i.e., heatmaps) that backs the tile analysis? You and Steve appear to be avoiding giving straight (or any) answers to some issues.
We understand, but unfortunately at the moment there is no capacity on the innovation team to follow up on this forum. We will let you know once there’s a platform facilitating open discussion on these MapMetrics-related topics, but in the meantime we advise you to send these questions to innovationteam@groups.tomtom.com.
What makes that email “works” but at the same time there is no capacity on the innovation team to follow up on this forum? That does not sound logical to me.
Not too many people are going to email them so that’s a time saver. Here on the forum there is question after question to be answered, which is not too unexpected as they are very limited on sharing any information that would turn this into something beneficial for both our use cases.
Strange that TomTom is reaching out to us and then kind of pull back…
TomTom was hoping for more enthousiasm? But this is what you get when you present an immature product to potential users/customers, hoping to sell. I’ve been there before in my geo IT job.
MarjanVan/Steve: if you’re not willing to engage with(in) the rest of(!) the OSM community here and be transparent/open regarding the current questions, I don’t think you can expect any engagement from us elsewhere (my €0,02).
“ Het bedrijf geeft niet aan welke extra bronnen nu worden aangesproken, of hoe het geautomatiseerde platform werkt. ”
OSM community als onbetaalde kaartmakers voor TomTom,
byebye maproulette
… niet alleen Garmin… Eigenlijk alles wat er aan GPS op de markt is draait wel op OSM… Denk bv aan MIO . Ook de diverse routingapps. Allemaal OSM. Daarmee voel ik me nog niet een onbetaalde kaartenmaker.
Wat de preciese reden van ontslag is bij TomTom… ? TomTom zal toch niet van de ene op de andere dag overstappen naar OSM?
Maar wie weet…
'k Weet nog goed dat je werd uitgelachen als je iets met OSM deed. Dat kon toch nooit wat zijn.
IK GEBRUIK MAPS.ME werd er mij toegeschreeuwd toen ik probeerde om OSM te verdedigen… en m’n fietsmaat zwaaide met z’n mobiel.
Ja maar maps.me is ook… probeerde ik nog… NEE HET IS MAPS.ME!!!
Gebruik maken van is iets anders dan wat tomtom doet: een maproulette bij osm neerzetten om kaarten waar je geld voor vraagt gratis te laten repareren en zo kosten besparen aan personeel. Ik kan zelf kaarten maken voor mijn garmin-gps, dat kan ik niet met een tomtom.
… en dat is het unieke aan een Garmin… Dat dat (nog) steeds kan…
Echter… Het pushen van maproulettes vanuit een bedrijf geeft me overigens geen goed gevoel.
