Based on a post elsewhere from the EWG, I’d suggest that getting an update from them as to what the current situation actually is is probably the way forward. I’d suggest asking:
Are they managing the communications with Microsoft, or is it individual editor authors, or something else?
Do we/they know whether what JOSM users are seeing is a “quota” issue or a “brownout” one (both have been suggested)?
Do we/they know why the “no tiles displayed” issue only affects JOSM but not iD, P3, Vespucci (for me at least - based on my testing just now)**
It’s possible that they may not be able to give complete answers to all these, but a yes.no answer to “are they owning the problem” should be possible.
** For completeness, I’d agree with this previous post and do see “some issues” (odd messages etc.) but I personally do see Bing imagery everywhere but JOSM (in the UK, over the same UK BT-provided IP address).
We do have a coordinated communication with Microsoft. Two weeks ago we asked if ok for all OSM editors to uses the key used by iD, as that account has a a different limit, and should be good until 2028. They have not yet responded. I just pinged on the thread now to see if we can make that move.
I can jump in to help with that. I will check if the ID key is ok to be used for JOSM. Send me a message who did you try to contact so I can include them into conversation
Just to be clear on this: this is an extremely bad idea, not only does it amount to simply kicking the can, it actively makes things worse. Any issues (and as you are not supporting the migration to Microsofts new service, all the systematic issues with the service will remain) will effect all applications using that key.
So I guess we have no choice than to suck up and provide MS with our credit card details (and phone numbers).
I have a have a hard time believing Microsoft will stop supporting one of the biggest tools to edit OSM. I think it just needs to reach the right person at Microsoft to fix the issue or come up with a solution to migrate to the new Azure service.
Nobody has implied that Microsoft is stopping support, though now that you mention it, their permission to use the Bing imagery is specific to that service and should be updated.
The problem is more that
we have to migrate, aka work (offset by the hope that going forward we can delete a lot of custom code).
sharing keys is bad (Azure might support generating multiple keys with restricted scope, so this is potentially solvable).
setting up individual Azure accounts (the alternative to the EWG doing something) requires developers to expose personal data to Microsoft and assume the financial risk.
The thing that is clear since the demise of Maxars offering (see the bit above about keys) there is a very unhealthy dependency on one imagery source at least in some regions.
Simon
PS: I started with OSM just a bit before we had access to Bing and any reasonable global high quality imagery, it is completely possible to map without imagery, today even more so then back then.
Imagery is essential for improving OSM in regions where nobody on the ground wants to. I had been carrying out a years-long project to add stop signs, traffic signals, and surface tags in Southern California, one of the world’s major metropolitan areas but without a sufficient local mapping community, and the interruption to Bing means I can’t contribute any more. (Esri is already too out of date in many places, Mapillary is only sparingly available, and other imagery is too low-resolution to see the pavement markings.)
Are you seriously blaming remote mappers for the lack of local mappers? Have you not considered that the lack of local mappers is due instead to other factors? In SoCal, one is dealing with 1) a vast surface area to map against a small population of local map nerds, and 2) a highly car-centric culture and (warranted or unwarranted) fear of crime that discourages people from walking and mapping in a large amount of neighborhoods. You are mixing up cause and effect here.
Erm - I think the last couple of responses might have drifted away from the topic of “Bing Imagery” a bit?
We haven’t had a proper thread about “local community mapping, or the lack of it, in the USA” for a while**, but perhaps somewhere other than here might be better for that?
2025-03-03 16:55:08.343 INFORMAÇÕES: GET https://josm.openstreetmap.de/mapkey/Bing -> HTTP/1.1 200 (697 ms; 65 B)
2025-03-03 16:55:09.097 INFORMAÇÕES: GET https://dev.virtualearth.net/REST/v1/Imagery/Metadata/AerialOSM?include=ImageryProviders&output=xml&key=...stripped... -> HTTP/1.1 403 (649 ms)
2025-03-03 16:55:09.100 INFORMAÇÕES: Successfully loaded Bing attribution data.
2025-03-03 16:55:09.178 GRAVE: Could not parse Bing aerials attribution metadata.
java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: ""
at java.base/java.lang.NumberFormatException.forInputString(Unknown Source)
at java.base/java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Unknown Source)
at java.base/java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Unknown Source)
at org.openstreetmap.gui.jmapviewer.tilesources.BingAerialTileSource.parseAttributionText(BingAerialTileSource.java:183)
at org.openstreetmap.josm.data.imagery.CachedAttributionBingAerialTileSource.access$200(CachedAttributionBingAerialTileSource.java:37)
at org.openstreetmap.josm.data.imagery.CachedAttributionBingAerialTileSource$AttributionTimerTask.run(CachedAttributionBingAerialTileSource.java:146)
at java.base/java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Unknown Source)
at java.base/java.util.TimerThread.run(Unknown Source)`
How did you do that? In my case, I still have the "Attribution is not loaded yet
" issue.
Did MS answered to the emails sent by OSM?
We at Latin America HOT mapping brigade are blocked, as maybe everyone in OSM community, to validate because the tasks used Bing imagery and we can’t use them in JOSM.
Thanks in advance for your efforts and for any update on this issue.
I guess it is due to the fact that JOSM requests the satellite images from Metadata API and OSM iD directly uses the URL generated in the Metadata API.
Is there any issue that causes JOSM to not be able to link Bing Aerial URL directly?