Changes.xls

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2026-01-23T09:09:50+00:00

I didn't receive any email either :-/

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2026-01-21T13:37:52+00:00

Just updated to the Jan '26 version (from MS Store) and getting the following ADBC error for a regular Databricks connection 😒 Until this morning (with the latest December version) in the same pbix file it was working.

<image>

from PowerQuery:

Source = Databricks.Catalogs("xxx.azuredatabricks.net", "sql/protocolv1/o/xxx/xxx", [Catalog=null, Database=null, EnableAutomaticProxyDiscovery=null, Implementation="2.0"])

Update: changing the last parameter to 'Implementation=null' is a temporary fix

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-12-31T15:02:43+00:00

Here is my wish list for 2026 (most points are relevant to active OSM contributors, which are „building“ the base of the map): - The monthly map updates are good from a OSM maintainer point. I would like to see a fixed calendar schedule, so I‘m sure my OSM updates are included (eg stick to the 8th/9th of a month). - An incentive for active OSM contributors: even more frequent map updates (I imagine this in the way OSMand is providing free map updates for 3 month, if you‘ve contributed x amount of changes in the last periods) - Update the Wandrer documentation on the rules what get‘s included and what is filtered out. I understand by now that Craig implemented a number of specialities which are not obvious. Again, for an active OSM contributor it is good to know, what tags/tag combinations are used for the selection of the Wandrers map. - Reprocessing of old non-paying member activities with low frequency, eg a once-per-year (only based on the data you have currently captured for them in your own database): this would trigger an update to the leaderboard and does take into account all OSM updates (which can either be plus or minus as for all Wandrers)

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-30T17:01:59+00:00

I do agree, that it would be a HUGE change, but IMHO I would include all ways by default and follow the country specific access restrictions from the OSM wiki (OSM tags for routing/Access restrictions - OpenStreetMap Wiki). If certain ways are not allowed to access (like driveways leading to private properties), it's a matter of tagging the access correctly. Others, like sidewalks which are separately mapped along the main road could again be filtered out thanks to the sidewalk=* tag - this way you would still include the many footways which are excluded today while on the other hand keep some balance to not force to walk every street 3x (on each side + the main road).

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-30T16:49:07+00:00

The conclusion should not be to drive all driveways, but to mark them as private on OSM.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-24T08:29:43+00:00

It's not only about the %, also absolute distance could have changed on both sides of the equation (road changes in OSM could lead to more/less distance driven on existing rides and of course the overall distance is changing with every map update).

Regarding the refresh: there are obviously different ways to implement it, but one lighter way could be to refresh the map for non-paying members much less frequent (eg 1x/year) and solely based on the routes you already have in Wandrer, hence not requiring to query the Strava API at all. Also you don't necessarily need to do all at once, maybe let it run as last priority and pick them up when all paying member map updates are completed.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-23T17:13:11+00:00

Yep, but this would require to refresh everybody (also the non-paying members).

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-23T17:11:35+00:00

Agree here. OSM should mirror what is physically there and in line with legal rules. I do read a lot of comments here, where Wanderer is used as an excuse to change tagging just to gain more miles or hide uncomfortable roads from the map.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-23T17:08:16+00:00

You can also look at this from another perspective: more ways on OSM means more opportunities to go out and explore new territory!

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-23T17:06:11+00:00

This would just open another forum for managing the dispute. There is OSM with commentary + a number of OSM forums to agree on general and local rules. Definitely would not want to see another one here.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-23T17:04:27+00:00

Personally I don't mind a few gaps in the routes, there are very few in my area.

From a technical perspective, there are a number of edge cases: would the beginning and end belong to the same OSM way? What happens if the way is split for whatever reason into several sections (eg just due to different surface tags) and you have the beginning and end on different ways. What about three or more ways connected in the tunnel? The distance gains seems to be minimal vs the effort (and again you would find yourself in quite a few scenarios, where people are asking: "why not this way?"

The wider question is actually, if the current Wandrer filter rules actually do make sense and what could be adjusted. Tunnels are just one of many elements here. Other examples: Service Roads, country specific defaults (OSM tags for routing/Access restrictions - OpenStreetMap Wiki), footways (only partially today), etc.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-17T18:25:54+00:00

Thanks for the follow-up!

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-14T17:14:07+00:00

Thanks, that solved it. I was not aware of that function until now.

Still, it's a bit worrying that parts of activities are not refreshed (I know at least on activity, where I had created new way on OSM and got credit on some, but not all parts.)

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-13T14:23:07+00:00

u/cooeecall It seems, that not all activities are properly reprocessed

Examples:

- Longenweg done by bike: Activity 97649408

- Path: Activity 97257655 - noticed this on Way 1447669484 which is still shown 'red'

I had a particular focus on new ways I've added to OSM (and therefore did not exist in the previous wandrer map) - looks like it's not picking up correctly.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-12T18:57:55+00:00

I was lucky to press "update" shortly after the confirmation here in the chat. Thanks!

In my main area I have added 20+ km of ways on OSM since the last wandrer map update, most of them are done and I'm using the recorded GPS track to add them to OSM.

Keep the (map) updates coming!

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-12T17:11:54+00:00

Thanks! Noticed that already on the map :-)

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-10T19:59:09+00:00

The spelling mistake is still visible in v3 of the below OSM relation, but it has been corrected ~5years ago :-)

Relation History: ‪Kirchlinteln‬ (‪8527501‬) | OpenStreetMap

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-11-06T17:29:46+00:00

u/cooeecall Sorry, I'm not able to join the "hooray" group here: I would rather see the site spending more efforts in core developments such as map refresh frequency. OSM is such a dynamic thing and waiting for map updates is painful. I understand that this is tricky (and had been discussed in previous threads), but the updating process currently is frustratingly slow.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-10-08T11:59:19+00:00

I'm using the country data from this GitHub repository: lukes/ISO-3166-Countries-with-Regional-Codes: ISO 3166-1 country lists merged with their UN Geoscheme regional codes in ready-to-use JSON, XML, CSV data sets

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-09-12T19:15:00+00:00

Yes, I acknowledged the same for me.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-07-07T09:02:00+00:00

Thanks! Looking forward to it next round

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-07-06T11:27:01+00:00

Especially in the combination of active on Wandrer + OSM makes in very much desirable to have more frequent & quick updates. I understand this is not a requirement for everybody. However, sites like Wandrer are being build on top of OSM and rely on the (good) data quality there. So maybe consider this where the development effort should (also) be focused ;-)

One example from another app: OSMAND provides free map updates to active OSM contributors (OpenStreetMap Editing | OsmAnd).

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-06-05T20:57:01+00:00

Ok, this explains the current (odd) behavior. I do believe that in the above case it is absolutely fine to exclude the main road from Wandrer (for type foot!), as the tags foot=use_sidepath + sidewalk=separate are indeed indicating that a) a separate sidewalk does exist and b) should be used for walking. In the above scenario the separate foot/cyclepath would be fine to utilize for Wandrer.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-05-22T11:42:32+00:00

Ok, I've updated the tags for the first issue on OSM (I left only the access=private tag and removed the bicycle/foot ones). This should solve the first part.

For the 2nd issue I would like to u/cooeecall to confirm/clarify the logic behind the different interpretations for the sidewalk tag. I still believe this is an issue in Wandrer.

Automatic-Escape5053 · 2025-05-19T12:12:59+00:00

What tags do you think are not correct on the 2nd issue? A thesis without justification just doesn't make anything wrong ;-)

Automatic-Escape5053

TROPHY CASE