Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Dan S]

For me, the convincing argument is not ease of querying; the
convincing argument is essentially namespacing. "uprn" and "usrn" are
rather generic initialisms, and I don't see any useful reason for our
uk/gb project to claim the "meaning" of ref:uprn or ref:usrn within
OSM's tag namespace.

I notice that "ref:usrn" has been used a lot - but in fact primarily
it came three years ago during a tree import in Birmingham. So even
though it's been used a lot, it's largely confined to one user/project
and I wouldn't consider it widespread.

Best
Dan


Op za 11 apr. 2020 om 02:06 schreef Dave F via Talk-GB
:
>
> Why country codes? OSM is geospatially aware.
>
> On 09/04/2020 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
> >  wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:
> >>> If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
> >>> Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
> >>> What should they be?
> > [snip]
> >> So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
> >> ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?
> > Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of
> > course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn
> > and ref:GB:usrn .
> >
> > Robert.
> >
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Dave F via Talk-GB]

Why country codes? OSM is geospatially aware.

On 09/04/2020 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
 wrote:

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:

If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
What should they be?

[snip]

So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?

Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of
course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn
and ref:GB:usrn .

Robert.




___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Mark Goodge]

On 10/04/2020 17:37, Brian Prangle wrote:

Can I ask two  basic daft questions?
What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing 
the lot ( which is  highly unlikely)?


UPRNs will be useful on any mapped building or area, as it will help 
link OSM data to other datasets in a consistent way.


Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence 
compatible?


That depends on what's in the dataset that eventually gets released as 
open data. I would expect that the canonical name of the street would be 
part of the data, though. If so, then yes, we can use it.


One of the reasons why the government has been persuaded to release 
UPRNs and USRNs as open data is because there is a big push to get third 
party data users (eg, utility companies, roadworks contractor and 
planning applicants) to use the same identifiers as government (local 
and national) already does internally, so as to minimise the risk of 
errors in conversion from one identifier to another. To some extent 
that's already happening, because the big guys are already paying for 
AddressBase and have a licence to use the data. But it's recognised that 
for it to become ubiquitous, the data has to be open as many potential 
users can't, or won't, pay for a commercial licence.


To give an example, a lot of planning applications for greenfield 
developments and agricultural buildings are on land that doesn't have an 
assigned postal address (because nobody sends post to a field or a 
barn!). So they get described on planning applications as something like 
"Land adjacent to 53 Greendale Lane" or "Barn in field behind 23 
Pencaster Road", which often isn't helpful as that can be ambiguous. The 
applicant has to provide what's called the "red line" plan showing the 
outline of the property to which the application refers, but these are 
not necessarily accurate. But if a UPRN is provided, the planning 
authority can look that up on the Land Registry database and see 
precisely where it is, and the extent of the property, without needing 
to rely on the applicant's information. And, again, while large scale 
professional developers almost always get it right (because they can 
afford to spend money on professional data and mapping), it's the small 
guys who often don't. So if they can be steered towards supplying the 
UPRN of the location, it will make things easier all round. But that 
relies on the UPRN being available and reusable in the first place.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 10/04/2020 17:37, Brian Prangle wrote:

Can I ask two  basic daft questions?

Perfectly reasonable questions ...

What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing 
the lot ( which is  highly unlikely)?
I'll repeat that we do need to wait and see exactly what will be 
released, and how comprehensive the data is, but in theory it should be 
quite possible to cross check a vast range of 'objects' in the database, 
and more important pick up additions and subtractions of those objects 
automatically. The comparison is probably with the French property 
database which I understand has been imported, but I would still prefer 
to be able to merge third party sources like this with the existing 
outline in OSM rather than simply importing everything into OSM ...


Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence 
compatible?
Exactly the same answer as above, but we know exactly what objects are 
being handled, and if populated, the exact status of a 'way' can be 
confirmed. The accuracy is only that of the data sources, but there is a 
legal requirement for councils to provide updates in timely manor. My 
feed was 3 monthly, but I think faster updates are now happening at 
least as new road names are created.


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Brian Prangle]

Can I ask two  basic daft questions?
What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing the
lot ( which is  highly unlikely)?
Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence
compatible?

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 13:14, Mark Goodge  wrote:

>
>
> On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:
> > If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn?
>
> It doesn't denote an address. While a lot of premises that have a UPRN
> also have an address, there are also many that don't. Every individual
> field in an agricultural area has a UPRN, for example, as do things like
> telephone boxes and street lamps. In fact, one of the main reasons
> behind the adoption of UPRNs as the unique identifier for properties is
> that addresses alone can't fulfil that purpose.
>
> Mark
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Mark Goodge]

On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:

If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn?


It doesn't denote an address. While a lot of premises that have a UPRN 
also have an address, there are also many that don't. Every individual 
field in an agricultural area has a UPRN, for example, as do things like 
telephone boxes and street lamps. In fact, one of the main reasons 
behind the adoption of UPRNs as the unique identifier for properties is 
that addresses alone can't fulfil that purpose.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Tony OSM]

Prefer capitalised
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn

as wikipage for ref https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref shows 
towards the end that US and FR are used to build up refs, FR has a page 
showing all their ref's 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/France/Liste_des_r%C3%A9f%C3%A9rences_nationales


Possibly of interest ISO 3166 allows for GB to be sudivided by local 
government area to produce eg


council areaGB-ABE  Aberdeen City   
en  

council areaGB-ABD  Aberdeenshire   
en  

council areaGB-ANS  Angus   
en  

districtGB-ANN  Antrim and Newtownabbey 
en


Not to be part of addr: but as standalone keys.

I recognise coding could obviate the need for GB - but that's hard work 
, GB is easy and memorable and matches what other OSM'rs are doing, and 
extensible if other countries have keys with the same acronym.


Tony Shield

On 09/04/2020 20:28, Dan S wrote:

Op do 9 apr. 2020 om 19:47 schreef Lester Caine :

On 09/04/2020 15:32, Mark Goodge wrote:

So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?

I'd be happy with either, so long as it's consistent.

That is ideal from my point of view ... yes you can get the country by
processing the location information, but being able to simply list all
of them WITHOUT the overhead of other processing has to be the right way
forward?

We could make such an argument about any tag, e.g. "addr:postcode"
couldn't we? Someone who wants a GB-only list can easily get them from
a GB extract such as Geofabrik's.

On the other hand I'm happy with "ref:gb:uprn" and "ref:gb:usrn" if
preferred (can we use lowercase for convenience please?) since it
seems these terms are not global.

Best
Dan

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 10/04/2020 08:04, Jez Nicholson wrote:
I don't think they meant 'replace an address with addr:uprn', just 
enhance it.


I was not being as clear as I should have been. A UPRN parcel of land or 
object includes those for which an address is not appropriate and which 
'Royal Mail' would never deliver to so I don't think it is appropriate 
to merge with the addr: set. I've already indicated that we need to wait 
and see just what quality of data will be provided, but I ecpevt that 
some council areas will not actually have postcode in the data. 
Certainly 15 years ago when I started receiving datasets this was a 
secondary piece of data yet at that time we were looking to manage the 
postcode tables for the councils that were providing the UPRN feed! They 
were not prepared to pay Royal Mail for data that they were legally 
required to create themselves ...


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Jez Nicholson]

I don't think they meant 'replace an address with addr:uprn', just enhance
it.

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020, 21:37 Lester Caine,  wrote:

> On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:
> > If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn?
> There is no intention that UPRN will replace an address. It will be able
> to return a unique address but there will be no move to remove that
> duplicate data from OSM. What the UPRN allows is the addition of
> external information which is also managed by public services.
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -
> Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:

If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn?
There is no intention that UPRN will replace an address. It will be able 
to return a unique address but there will be no move to remove that 
duplicate data from OSM. What the UPRN allows is the addition of 
external information which is also managed by public services.


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[ndrw6]

If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn?

ndrw6



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Dan S]

Op do 9 apr. 2020 om 19:47 schreef Lester Caine :
>
> On 09/04/2020 15:32, Mark Goodge wrote:
> >> So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
> >> ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?
> >
> > I'd be happy with either, so long as it's consistent.
>
> That is ideal from my point of view ... yes you can get the country by
> processing the location information, but being able to simply list all
> of them WITHOUT the overhead of other processing has to be the right way
> forward?

We could make such an argument about any tag, e.g. "addr:postcode"
couldn't we? Someone who wants a GB-only list can easily get them from
a GB extract such as Geofabrik's.

On the other hand I'm happy with "ref:gb:uprn" and "ref:gb:usrn" if
preferred (can we use lowercase for convenience please?) since it
seems these terms are not global.

Best
Dan

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 09/04/2020 15:32, Mark Goodge wrote:

So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?


I'd be happy with either, so long as it's consistent.


That is ideal from my point of view ... yes you can get the country by 
processing the location information, but being able to simply list all 
of them WITHOUT the overhead of other processing has to be the right way 
forward?


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Mark Goodge]

On 09/04/2020 17:18, Andy Mabbett wrote:

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 13:06, Mark Goodge  wrote:


They're a 10 to 12 digit integer.


Is there a check digit?


No, they're a simple sequential allocation. So an error can't be 
detected internally, it does need to be verified. But the same is true 
of postcodes and phone numbers, of course.


Similarly to the way that telephone numbers are allocated, though, UPRNs 
are allocated in blocks to local authorities who then assign them out of 
their block. So the first few digits of a UPRN will tell you 
approximately where in the country it is. In fact, you can already link 
a UPRN to administrative geography via existing open data, it's only 
drilling right down to precise coordinates that isn't currently possible.


If I was designing the checkout process for an online retailer that 
allowed customers to enter their UPRN rather than a postal address, what 
I'd do is show them a map, with their UPRN location marked, and ask them 
to confirm that that is, indeed, the premises they want the item 
delivered to. That could be done entirely using open data (once UPRNs 
are open), but a commercial supplier might also want to enhance that by 
using an address lookup to generate the geographic address from the UPRN 
and display that to the customer as well.

Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 13:06, Mark Goodge  wrote:

> They're a 10 to 12 digit integer.

Is there a check digit?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Mark Goodge]

On 09/04/2020 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:


I would have said that ref:uprn and ref:usrn are the natural choices
for use to use. However, I've seen some calls for country codes to be
added to 3rd-party ref values, so we might consider ref:UK:uprn and
ref:UK:usrn instead. This isn't explicitly documented in the wiki at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref though the French
community seems to be using it, as can be seen at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/France/Liste_des_r%C3%A9f%C3%A9rences_nationales
, and I think it might make sense.


I agree that adding a country identifier makes sense. One of the key 
attributes of a UPRN is that it is unique within a country. But it may 
not be globally unique if other countries adopt a similar system. And, 
because it's just an integer, unlike a postcode, you can't infer the 
country from the format. But, on the other hand, adding another layer 
makes it more likely that people will tag them wrongly using what they 
think is the right method simply because that's what's most obvious to them.



I don't see any value in adding NLPG (or it's incorrectly ordered
variant NPLG). Although the National Land and Property Gazetteer is
where the UPRN values originate from, if they're being used as core
identifiers by the government, they're no longer just NLPG values.


I agree with this, too. The NLPG is just a database of UPRNs and other 
data, it isn't the source of them.



I also don't see any benefit in adding a :1 :2 etc suffix to the key
in anticipation of multiple values (which seems to have been done in
several existing UPRN keys). I think this will actually make it harder
for data-users than having a single key name and separating multiple
values with semi-colons. (You would suddenly need to search multiple
different keys to get all possible UPRN-tagged objects.)

So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?


I'd be happy with either, so long as it's consistent.

Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Simon Poole]

It would seem to be "rather" unlikely that such reference ids would be
named UPRN and UPSN outside of the UK to start with, so a more generic
building_ref, street_ref or similar would be likely more sensible (if
there is any value at all in mapping these). And yes similar concepts
exist outside of the UK too, however I do not know any case of them
finding wide spread use in lieu of addresses any where.

Simon

Am 09.04.2020 um 16:08 schrieb Gareth L:
> Can’t the key location be inferred by the fact it is within a country bounds 
> rather than redundantly added?
>
> Gareth
>
>> On 9 Apr 2020, at 14:46, Tony OSM  wrote:
>>
>> That makes perfect sense to me.
>>
>> Any other views?
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>> On 09/04/2020 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
 On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
  wrote:
 On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:
> If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
> Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
> What should they be?
>>> [snip]
 So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
 ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?
>>> Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of
>>> course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn
>>> and ref:GB:usrn .
>>>
>>> Robert.
>>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Gareth L]

Can’t the key location be inferred by the fact it is within a country bounds 
rather than redundantly added?

Gareth

> On 9 Apr 2020, at 14:46, Tony OSM  wrote:
> 
> That makes perfect sense to me.
> 
> Any other views?
> 
> Tony
> 
>> On 09/04/2020 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
>>>  wrote:
>>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:
 If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
 Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
 What should they be?
>> [snip]
>>> So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
>>> ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?
>> Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of
>> course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn
>> and ref:GB:usrn .
>> 
>> Robert.
>> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Tony OSM]

That makes perfect sense to me.

Any other views?

Tony

On 09/04/2020 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
 wrote:

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:

If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
What should they be?

[snip]

So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?

Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of
course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn
and ref:GB:usrn .

Robert.



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
 wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:
> > If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
> > Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
> > What should they be?
>
[snip]
>
> So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
> ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?

Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of
course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn
and ref:GB:usrn .

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM  wrote:
> If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
> Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?
> What should they be?

Looking at taginfo, there are a number of different tags in use for
UPRN values (see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=uprn
where ref:NPLG:UPRN:1 is the most popular). I think it would be good
to agree on a standard key to use before too many more are added. USRN
values are more standardised:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=usrn with ref:usrn and
NPLG:USRN:1 being the only two keys in use. (NPLG presumably refers to
the National Land and Property Gazetteer -- see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Land_and_Property_Gazetteer --
but the middle two letters are the wrong way round.)

I would have said that ref:uprn and ref:usrn are the natural choices
for use to use. However, I've seen some calls for country codes to be
added to 3rd-party ref values, so we might consider ref:UK:uprn and
ref:UK:usrn instead. This isn't explicitly documented in the wiki at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref though the French
community seems to be using it, as can be seen at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/France/Liste_des_r%C3%A9f%C3%A9rences_nationales
, and I think it might make sense.

I don't see any value in adding NLPG (or it's incorrectly ordered
variant NPLG). Although the National Land and Property Gazetteer is
where the UPRN values originate from, if they're being used as core
identifiers by the government, they're no longer just NLPG values.

I also don't see any benefit in adding a :1 :2 etc suffix to the key
in anticipation of multiple values (which seems to have been done in
several existing UPRN keys). I think this will actually make it harder
for data-users than having a single key name and separating multiple
values with semi-colons. (You would suddenly need to search multiple
different keys to get all possible UPRN-tagged objects.)

So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think?

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Mark Goodge]

On 03/04/2020 10:15, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote:
So, will I have to quote a 20-digit alpha-numeric code, if I want to 
order something from Amazon? ..or get my grandchildren to send me a 
birthday card?


(I do not know what these UPRN's look like, but I bet they are not as 
easy to remember as "Rose Cottage, 3 Church Lane, XX3 4ZZ")


They're a 10 to 12 digit integer. At most, that's one digit longer than 
a telephone number. It's shorter than a credit card number. Mine is 
100121279888. For memorability, I could format that as 1001 2127 9888, 
pronounced "one thousand and one, two one two seven, nine triple-eight".


It isn't necessary to remember all of them, or even any of them, other 
than your own. Once they're open data they can be stored in any address 
book, along with things like email address and phone numbers. And to 
find out where they actually are, you just search for them on Google 
Maps, OSM, Bing Maps or any other mapping provider. Imagine, for 
example, that I have this entry in my phone's contact list:


Alice Example
phone: 01234 567890
mobile: 07654 321321
email: al...@example.com
uprn: 123456789012

If I want to phone Alice, I just tap on the number and the phone dials 
it. If I want to email Alice, I tap on the email address and my phone 
opens the email app with her address prefilled as the recipient. And if 
I want to visit her, I tap on the UPRN and my phone opens the default 
mapping app with a marker showing her location, and offers to provide me 
with directions on how to get there. I don't need to look up anything 
other than her name.


That doesn't stop anyone using the existing methods of storing an 
address. But it will make it hugely simpler for anyone who stores them 
in bulk, such as online retailers.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 09/04/2020 10:46, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote:

Hi Lester,

Sorry if my post was a bit of a rant.  I have a history of having to 
fight to get IT systems that do the hard work and preventing them 
demanding that people do the translation into "machine-speak".
My rant has always been that postcodes are proprietary data and even in 
the NLPG data there is a question on if one can use it! The whole thing 
has always been a mess. Postal Address File I have no problem on being 
proprietary, just not the postcode on it's own ...



Thanks for the explanation.


I've had to change most of the references but
https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk/wiki/view/NLPG+Data
is now up to date, just again, BS7666 is another chargeable element and 
my copy is no longer available on-line :(


OH and it should be UPRN/USRN nowadays ... my 2006 databases still have 
the USN field name.


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

Hi Lester,
Sorry if my post was a bit of a rant.  I have a history of having to fight to 
get IT systems that do the hard work and preventing them demanding that people 
do the translation into "machine-speak".
Thanks for the explanation.
Regards,Peter
On Thursday, 9 April 2020, 10:29:05 BST, Lester Caine  
wrote:  
 
 On 03/04/2020 10:15, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote:
> So, will I have to quote a 20-digit alpha-numeric code, if I want to 
> order something from Amazon? ..or get my grandchildren to send me a 
> birthday card?
> 
> (I do not know what these UPRN's look like, but I bet they are not as 
> easy to remember as "Rose Cottage, 3 Church Lane, XX3 4ZZ")
> 
> We have to think about human readability and memorability, versus 
> machine computability and we need to be careful not to make the humans 
> do all the work, just to make it easier for the machines.  Making me use 
> a PostCode is already making me do some of the work, but at least they 
> are only 6 or 7 characters.

The NLPG is intended to provide a single database of all the land in the 
United Kingdom. Councils have been building this for many years now, and 
it allows parcels of land that the Post Office do not have any reference 
to in their Postal Address File to be uniquely identified. Looking up 
data using Postcodes can be fun but often due to people having the wrong 
postcode anyway. We can identify the vast majority of residential and 
business locations using 'building Number'/'Postcode', but additional 
data is useful to identify that this short form is actually correct, but 
your council tax or business rates will be charged against the UPRN 
reference on the council systems. It is not intended to be anything 
other than a 'machine readable' unique refference ...

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
  ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 03/04/2020 10:15, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote:
So, will I have to quote a 20-digit alpha-numeric code, if I want to 
order something from Amazon? ..or get my grandchildren to send me a 
birthday card?


(I do not know what these UPRN's look like, but I bet they are not as 
easy to remember as "Rose Cottage, 3 Church Lane, XX3 4ZZ")


We have to think about human readability and memorability, versus 
machine computability and we need to be careful not to make the humans 
do all the work, just to make it easier for the machines.  Making me use 
a PostCode is already making me do some of the work, but at least they 
are only 6 or 7 characters.


The NLPG is intended to provide a single database of all the land in the 
United Kingdom. Councils have been building this for many years now, and 
it allows parcels of land that the Post Office do not have any reference 
to in their Postal Address File to be uniquely identified. Looking up 
data using Postcodes can be fun but often due to people having the wrong 
postcode anyway. We can identify the vast majority of residential and 
business locations using 'building Number'/'Postcode', but additional 
data is useful to identify that this short form is actually correct, but 
your council tax or business rates will be charged against the UPRN 
reference on the council systems. It is not intended to be anything 
other than a 'machine readable' unique refference ...


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Lester Caine]

On 09/04/2020 09:19, Tony OSM wrote:

Thanks to Andy for highlighting this.

If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.
As someone who has been using this data internally for clients who are 
the councils who have been providing it TO the charged for services I'm 
pleased that now I will not have to worry about linking that data to OSM 
data.



Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref:NPLG:UPRN:1
has existed for a while, but the matching Key:ref:NPLG:UPSN:1 doesn't as 
yet. Personally I think this style is messy and a GB/UK element would 
make sense ... and actually identifying that this is United Kingdom 
related in the wiki page would be helpful!



What should they be?

Do we need a wiki for them , where?  I'll summarise the answers and 
create a wiki page if someone tells me where to place it - a UK specific 
page or section?


Any traction in creating tools to help populating any new tags?
It will be nice to see just what level if data is provided on the public 
feed when it becomes available. The level and accuracy of the data IS 
very much dependent on the level of effort that each council puts in, 
with some providing the full details of the land area described while 
others only provide a location reference. So there will be some problems 
producing a 'generic' tool to add UPRN tags to buildings and land plots. 
USN references should be a lot easier to automatically merge since the 
street name provided via OS data sets is the same one as used in USPN 
... or should be ...



Could this be a subject for a discussion as the probably virtual OSM AGM?


This is just a United Kingdom discussion currently although as I 
understand it a few other countries do have something similar so a 
common country based tag for 'Property Reference' and 'Street Reference' 
may be a valid subject. But UPRN and USN seem right anyway.


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Tony OSM]

Thanks to Andy for highlighting this.

If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging.

Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data?

What should they be?

Do we need a wiki for them , where?  I'll summarise the answers and 
create a wiki page if someone tells me where to place it - a UK specific 
page or section?


Any traction in creating tools to help populating any new tags?

Could this be a subject for a discussion as the probably virtual OSM AGM?

 Regards - and stay safe

Tony Shield

TonyS999

On 02/04/2020 16:08, Andy Mabbett wrote:

"Unique Property and Street Reference Numbers to become the standard
way of referencing and sharing address information about properties
and streets across government, helping to transform public services
and boost our economy"

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/geospatial-commission-to-release-core-identifiers-under-open-government-licence



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

So, will I have to quote a 20-digit alpha-numeric code, if I want to order 
something from Amazon? ..or get my grandchildren to send me a birthday card?
(I do not know what these UPRN's look like, but I bet they are not as easy to 
remember as "Rose Cottage, 3 Church Lane, XX3 4ZZ") 
We have to think about human readability and memorability, versus machine 
computability and we need to be careful not to make the humans do all the work, 
just to make it easier for the machines.  Making me use a PostCode is already 
making me do some of the work, but at least they are only 6 or 7 characters. 
Regards,Peter

On Friday, 3 April 2020, 09:59:27 BST, Mark Goodge  
wrote:  
 
 

On 03/04/2020 09:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

> There will presumably be a drive in government circles to store
> addresses as UPRN's, and then fetch the associated location and
> address data from AddressBase. Assuming Rob's interpretation is
> correct (I think it probably is) then this could be bad new for
> sources of addresses and postcodes for OSM. While we'll be more easily
> able to geo-locate objects from their URPN's, the actual addresses in
> any datasets will become more likely to be contaminated by OS's IP
> rights in AddressBase.

In the long run, I suspect this could actually spell the end for postal 
addresses (as distinct from geographic addresses). If every property has 
a published, unique number, analogous to a telephone number, then all 
that's necessary for, say, Amazon to deliver a package to me is for them 
to know the UPRN of my house. Their routing software will then do all 
the heavy lifting of plotting how to get the package from their depot to 
my door.

Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
  ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Mark Goodge]

On 03/04/2020 09:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:


There will presumably be a drive in government circles to store
addresses as UPRN's, and then fetch the associated location and
address data from AddressBase. Assuming Rob's interpretation is
correct (I think it probably is) then this could be bad new for
sources of addresses and postcodes for OSM. While we'll be more easily
able to geo-locate objects from their URPN's, the actual addresses in
any datasets will become more likely to be contaminated by OS's IP
rights in AddressBase.


In the long run, I suspect this could actually spell the end for postal 
addresses (as distinct from geographic addresses). If every property has 
a published, unique number, analogous to a telephone number, then all 
that's necessary for, say, Amazon to deliver a package to me is for them 
to know the UPRN of my house. Their routing software will then do all 
the heavy lifting of plotting how to get the package from their depot to 
my door.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 22:19, RobJN  wrote:
> It's all a bit unclear but from what I've read it sounds like there will be
> a release of the UPRN / UPSN identifiers and their associated geometries
> ("coordinates" in some text). I see no reference to address data being part
> of the release.

There will presumably be a drive in government circles to store
addresses as UPRN's, and then fetch the associated location and
address data from AddressBase. Assuming Rob's interpretation is
correct (I think it probably is) then this could be bad new for
sources of addresses and postcodes for OSM. While we'll be more easily
able to geo-locate objects from their URPN's, the actual addresses in
any datasets will become more likely to be contaminated by OS's IP
rights in AddressBase.

So this news could be a bit of a double-edged sword I think. e.g. if
the FHRS data switched to using UPRNs and AddressBase-derived
addresses, we would lose the ability to make use of addresses and
postcodes from the FHRS data, but then we'd have accurate locations we
could rely on to directly add establishments to the map from their
FHRS entry.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[RobJN]

As always, Owen has a good write-up:

https://twitter.com/owenboswarva/status/1245763596782575617?s=19

Thank you
Rob



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[RobJN]

Hi Jez,

It's all a bit unclear but from what I've read it sounds like there will be
a release of the UPRN / UPSN identifiers and their associated geometries
("coordinates" in some text). I see no reference to address data being part
of the release.

What it will mean is that there will be an easy way to geolocate any
datasets that have these identifiers. Currently you have to do this based on
postcode or address (and we know that addresses can be fuzzy things).

It's probably worth at least one of us writing to them to confirm exactly
what will be released.

Thank you
Rob





--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Jez Nicholson]

please tell me that does not mean that rather than releasing geodata with
lat-lon, street address, etc., UK Govt will use a proprietary id instead?
and to turn this id into something usable I have to licence an OS product.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 4:10 PM Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> "Unique Property and Street Reference Numbers to become the standard
> way of referencing and sharing address information about properties
> and streets across government, helping to transform public services
> and boost our economy"
>
>
> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/geospatial-commission-to-release-core-identifiers-under-open-government-licence
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Andy Mabbett]

"Unique Property and Street Reference Numbers to become the standard
way of referencing and sharing address information about properties
and streets across government, helping to transform public services
and boost our economy"

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/geospatial-commission-to-release-core-identifiers-under-open-government-licence

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[Gregory]

Sorry I'm late to this thread.

OSM UK CIC, we posted this statement:
https://osmuk.org/pinned/uk-set-to-benefit-from-the-release-of-more-geospatial-data/
Although it gives a viewpoint on the budget, the OSM UK community is not
limited to the aims of the CIC.


Is the £80m even to free up OSMM?
I read it as...
a) £80m for the Geospatial Commission (for sandwiches during their
meetings?)
b) it's *first* task is to establish *how to* open up MM, not part of the
task to actually do that.


Some say this could be a victory for OSM UK, or...
It could be a victory for OS, and they pack up and go home, because now OSM
will keep MM up-to-date?


>From Newcastle,
Gregory.

On 24 November 2017 at 14:06, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:

> A note on the side (and maybe an angle to divert some of those funds to
> something really useful): what has always struck me very weird about open
> geo data in the UK, compared to practically every other Western European
> country (even those with far, far less open data), is the, in general,
> dismal aerial imagery quality. It is not unusual to have at least nominal
> resolution 25cm/px imagery if not 10cm and better in lots of places for
> larger areas.
>
> In my experience (which is fairly extensive in this regard) freeing up
> imagery is much easier than actual datasets and our use case is rather
> exotic in any case so typically not seen as a competitive danger.
>
> Simon
>
> Am 24.11.2017 um 12:22 schrieb Andy Robinson:
>
> Indeed Bob’s may be the best case scenario and I note perhaps the more
> cynical view taken by the likes of Ed Parkes.
>
>
>
> I let out a little wee in my pants when I heard the budget announcement.
> Geospatial doesn’t get mentioned much on the floor of the house! So it’s an
> encouraging further nipping at the heels of the giant.
>
>
>
> Each time I hear a welcome apparently positive announcement like this it
> makes me pause and wonder whether the tail is wagging the dog. The
> chancellor might be making funds available but the campaigning to get it is
> not done by the politicians but by those who feel it’s a worthwhile cause,
> they needed to sell it. So what influences drives like this? It’s easy to
> dismiss the role of OSM, in fact OSM may have never figured in the
> discussion about this new money, however I like to think we have influenced
> the marketplace for geospatial data in the UK and will continue to think we
> are (in our little world) the tail.
>
>
>
> So that brings me on to the what next for OSM. Could it indeed have the
> potential to be the end of contribution to OSM in the UK?  Fortunately I
> think not. We are unique in the marketplace that we can react to new cheap
> technology much quicker than the giants like the OS. Around the corner is
> the prospect of the L1/L5 GNSS dual frequency exploitation to bring us sub
> metre positional accuracy with a standard smart phone. While the claimed
> 300mm accuracy is still a long way short of the OS’s 30mm surveying target
> for MasterMap products its getting us closer to being able to verify the
> near precise position of objects, better local rectification of the imagery
> we trace from and I’m sure lots of other things I’m just not thinking of
> right now. If we combine this with where technology is leading us –
> driverless devices, autonomous drones, improved remote sensing from
> satellites etc – we can expect the tools we use today to add to and
> maintain OSM in the UK to be every improving.
>
>
>
> I believe there is another important point too. MasterMap may be a great
> product today but I’m not convinced its fit for even the next 10 years.
> Some of the industries that uses MasterMap in the UK, engineering and the
> building industry to name just two, are rapidly moving to a 3 & 4
> dimensional BIM approach. The 2D MasterMap looks more like an NPE sheet in
> the BIM field.
>
>
>
> But, I hear you say, OSM is mostly a 2D product! Right! While we may be
> winning the battle on getting the OS to open up its data we may be losing
> the war if OSM doesn’t react to the future direction of geospatial data. In
> an increasingly 3D and 4D geospatial world OSM is starting to look like a
> rather clunky model. If a new Steve Coast starts a 4D mapping project and
> it gains initial traction would we jump ship?
>
>
>
> I’ll leave that one with you for the weekend J
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* SK53 [mailto:sk53@gmail.com <sk53@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* 23 November 2017 19:14
> *To:* Gervase Markham
> *Cc:* Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission
>
>
>
> The twitterverse has been talking of nothing else.
>
> Personally, I will be very 

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[Simon Poole]

A note on the side (and maybe an angle to divert some of those funds to
something really useful): what has always struck me very weird about
open geo data in the UK, compared to practically every other Western
European country (even those with far, far less open data), is the, in
general, dismal aerial imagery quality. It is not unusual to have at
least nominal resolution 25cm/px imagery if not 10cm and better in lots
of places for larger areas.

In my experience (which is fairly extensive in this regard) freeing up
imagery is much easier than actual datasets and our use case is rather
exotic in any case so typically not seen as a competitive danger.

Simon


Am 24.11.2017 um 12:22 schrieb Andy Robinson:
>
> Indeed Bob’s may be the best case scenario and I note perhaps the more
> cynical view taken by the likes of Ed Parkes.
>
>  
>
> I let out a little wee in my pants when I heard the budget
> announcement. Geospatial doesn’t get mentioned much on the floor of
> the house! So it’s an encouraging further nipping at the heels of the
> giant.
>
>  
>
> Each time I hear a welcome apparently positive announcement like this
> it makes me pause and wonder whether the tail is wagging the dog. The
> chancellor might be making funds available but the campaigning to get
> it is not done by the politicians but by those who feel it’s a
> worthwhile cause, they needed to sell it. So what influences drives
> like this? It’s easy to dismiss the role of OSM, in fact OSM may have
> never figured in the discussion about this new money, however I like
> to think we have influenced the marketplace for geospatial data in the
> UK and will continue to think we are (in our little world) the tail.
>
>  
>
> So that brings me on to the what next for OSM. Could it indeed have
> the potential to be the end of contribution to OSM in the UK?
>  Fortunately I think not. We are unique in the marketplace that we can
> react to new cheap technology much quicker than the giants like the
> OS. Around the corner is the prospect of the L1/L5 GNSS dual frequency
> exploitation to bring us sub metre positional accuracy with a standard
> smart phone. While the claimed 300mm accuracy is still a long way
> short of the OS’s 30mm surveying target for MasterMap products its
> getting us closer to being able to verify the near precise position of
> objects, better local rectification of the imagery we trace from and
> I’m sure lots of other things I’m just not thinking of right now. If
> we combine this with where technology is leading us – driverless
> devices, autonomous drones, improved remote sensing from satellites
> etc – we can expect the tools we use today to add to and maintain OSM
> in the UK to be every improving.
>
>  
>
> I believe there is another important point too. MasterMap may be a
> great product today but I’m not convinced its fit for even the next 10
> years. Some of the industries that uses MasterMap in the UK,
> engineering and the building industry to name just two, are rapidly
> moving to a 3 & 4 dimensional BIM approach. The 2D MasterMap looks
> more like an NPE sheet in the BIM field.
>
>  
>
> But, I hear you say, OSM is mostly a 2D product! Right! While we may
> be winning the battle on getting the OS to open up its data we may be
> losing the war if OSM doesn’t react to the future direction of
> geospatial data. In an increasingly 3D and 4D geospatial world OSM is
> starting to look like a rather clunky model. If a new Steve Coast
> starts a 4D mapping project and it gains initial traction would we
> jump ship?
>
>  
>
> I’ll leave that one with you for the weekend J
>
>  
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>  
>
> *From:*SK53 [mailto:sk53@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 23 November 2017 19:14
> *To:* Gervase Markham
> *Cc:* Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission
>
>  
>
> The twitterverse has been talking of nothing else.
>
> Personally, I will be very cautiously optimistic.
>
> The best case scenario is one suggested by Bob Barr:
>
>   * OSGB changes it's business model from pay-to-use to transaction
> based (a la Land Registry).
>   * The £80 million (2 years at £40 million) is used to cushion
> revenue & staff implications
>   * Master Map is then released under OGL going on
>
> Perhaps more likely is a special free service agreement for restricted
> classes of businesses (SMEs) along the lines of PSMA (I blagged this
> point from someone else).
>
> Even if MM is all under OGL I suspect OSGB would not acquiesce to the
> current form of attribution on OSM.
>
> Owen Boswarva's asks if this would
> <https://twitter.com/owenboswarva/status/933477244269481984s>mean

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[Andy Robinson]

Indeed Bob’s may be the best case scenario and I note perhaps the more cynical 
view taken by the likes of Ed Parkes.

 

I let out a little wee in my pants when I heard the budget announcement. 
Geospatial doesn’t get mentioned much on the floor of the house! So it’s an 
encouraging further nipping at the heels of the giant.

 

Each time I hear a welcome apparently positive announcement like this it makes 
me pause and wonder whether the tail is wagging the dog. The chancellor might 
be making funds available but the campaigning to get it is not done by the 
politicians but by those who feel it’s a worthwhile cause, they needed to sell 
it. So what influences drives like this? It’s easy to dismiss the role of OSM, 
in fact OSM may have never figured in the discussion about this new money, 
however I like to think we have influenced the marketplace for geospatial data 
in the UK and will continue to think we are (in our little world) the tail.

 

So that brings me on to the what next for OSM. Could it indeed have the 
potential to be the end of contribution to OSM in the UK?  Fortunately I think 
not. We are unique in the marketplace that we can react to new cheap technology 
much quicker than the giants like the OS. Around the corner is the prospect of 
the L1/L5 GNSS dual frequency exploitation to bring us sub metre positional 
accuracy with a standard smart phone. While the claimed 300mm accuracy is still 
a long way short of the OS’s 30mm surveying target for MasterMap products its 
getting us closer to being able to verify the near precise position of objects, 
better local rectification of the imagery we trace from and I’m sure lots of 
other things I’m just not thinking of right now. If we combine this with where 
technology is leading us – driverless devices, autonomous drones, improved 
remote sensing from satellites etc – we can expect the tools we use today to 
add to and maintain OSM in the UK to be every improving. 

 

I believe there is another important point too. MasterMap may be a great 
product today but I’m not convinced its fit for even the next 10 years. Some of 
the industries that uses MasterMap in the UK, engineering and the building 
industry to name just two, are rapidly moving to a 3 & 4 dimensional BIM 
approach. The 2D MasterMap looks more like an NPE sheet in the BIM field. 

 

But, I hear you say, OSM is mostly a 2D product! Right! While we may be winning 
the battle on getting the OS to open up its data we may be losing the war if 
OSM doesn’t react to the future direction of geospatial data. In an 
increasingly 3D and 4D geospatial world OSM is starting to look like a rather 
clunky model. If a new Steve Coast starts a 4D mapping project and it gains 
initial traction would we jump ship?

 

I’ll leave that one with you for the weekend J

 

Cheers

Andy

 

From: SK53 [mailto:sk53@gmail.com] 
Sent: 23 November 2017 19:14
To: Gervase Markham
Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

 

The twitterverse has been talking of nothing else.

Personally, I will be very cautiously optimistic.

The best case scenario is one suggested by Bob Barr:

*   OSGB changes it's business model from pay-to-use to transaction based 
(a la Land Registry). 
*   The £80 million (2 years at £40 million) is used to cushion revenue & 
staff implications
*   Master Map is then released under OGL going on

Perhaps more likely is a special free service agreement for restricted classes 
of businesses (SMEs) along the lines of PSMA (I blagged this point from someone 
else).

Even if MM is all under OGL I suspect OSGB would not acquiesce to the current 
form of attribution on OSM.

Owen Boswarva's asks if this would  
<https://twitter.com/owenboswarva/status/933477244269481984s> mean the end of 
OSM mapping in UK. A provocative thought.

Jerry

 

On 23 November 2017 at 15:56, Gervase Markham <gerv-gm...@gerv.net> wrote:

This sounds... vaguely positive?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-to-unlock-hidden-value-of-government-data

Gerv


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[jc...@mail.com]

Ed Parkes has a more pessimistic take on the money:
https://medium.com/@edtparkes/well-need-more-than-20m-a-year-to-get-free-maps-specifically-politicians-willing-to-share-e27e86c356ba

On a related topic, remember there was £5m in March 2016 Budget to explore 
options for open addresses and we're still waiting to find out the results:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/money_for_the_address_register_2

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[Simon Poole]

Am 23.11.2017 um 20:13 schrieb SK53:
> ...
>
> Owen Boswarva's asks if this would
> mean the
> end of OSM mapping in UK. A provocative thought.
>
> ...
Well Owen is not exactly known as a big friend of OSM to start with.

But in any case OSM has survived easily in lots of different scenarios
with plenty of government open data (or what is more likely in this
scenario some kind of open access), so I would remain rather un-fazed by
the announcement of the intent to do something more or less unspecified
to opening up some use to SMEs.

Simon

PS: I believe one of the open questions is if it is actually £80m more
spending on OS than the what I believe current £40m, or if that is the
total.





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[SK53]

The twitterverse has been talking of nothing else.

Personally, I will be very cautiously optimistic.

The best case scenario is one suggested by Bob Barr:

   - OSGB changes it's business model from pay-to-use to transaction based
   (a la Land Registry).
   - The £80 million (2 years at £40 million) is used to cushion revenue &
   staff implications
   - Master Map is then released under OGL going on

Perhaps more likely is a special free service agreement for restricted
classes of businesses (SMEs) along the lines of PSMA (I blagged this point
from someone else).

Even if MM is all under OGL I suspect OSGB would not acquiesce to the
current form of attribution on OSM.

Owen Boswarva's asks if this would
mean the end
of OSM mapping in UK. A provocative thought.

Jerry

On 23 November 2017 at 15:56, Gervase Markham  wrote:

> This sounds... vaguely positive?
> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-to-unlock-
> hidden-value-of-government-data
>
> Gerv
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[Dave F]

I think it's 'a wait & see' until the final decision is made, but paying 
£80m over two years to buy something we've already paid for doesn't seem 
good value for money.


DaveF


On 23/11/2017 15:56, Gervase Markham wrote:

This sounds... vaguely positive?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-to-unlock-hidden-value-of-government-data

Gerv


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[Gervase Markham]

This sounds... vaguely positive?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chancellor-to-unlock-hidden-value-of-government-data

Gerv


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb