Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas

[Warin]

If the thought is to map a group of blocks as an area .. then my vote is 
no at least without more information.
It raises the question as to what the level of obstruction is - are 
motorcycles bared by this barrier? Horses? How badly are pedestrians 
impeded? What about people in wheelchairs?

So there needs to be a scale of impediment.

On 17/08/18 02:57, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
An use case for allow mapping barrier=block as asreas is a better 
visualisation of a landcoverage. Mapping aeral objects as a nodes 
makes the map a little bit lied.


-- Wiadomość oryginalna --
Od: "Philip Barnes" mailto:p...@trigpoint.me.uk>>
Do: talk@openstreetmap.org ; "David 
Fox" >; "Tomasz Wójcik" >

Data: 16.08.2018 10:05:11
Temat: Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas


Hedges can certainly be areas, some can be a few metres thick.

A common mapping scenario is a thick hedge and a stile at each side. 
The only way to represent this is to map as an area and map the 
stiles as nodes connected to the outline.


Phil (trigpoint)

On 16 August 2018 01:14:49 BST, David Fox 
mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com>> 
wrote:


Barriers, by definition, provide some level of restriction.
Without attaching them in some form it becomes hard for routers
to account for them.
Hedges and walls are linear in nature, not an area.



On 15 August 2018, at 19:51, Tomasz Wójcik mailto:tom...@wp.pl>> wrote:


Currently, barrier=block is not allowed to be mapped as an area.
As blocks can be big enough to map them as areas, I think it
should be allowed, the same as in barrier=wall or barrier=hedge.
Anyway, currently we have 3,9k of barrier=block areas in database.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dblock

Block examples:

http://www.concrete-barriers-blocks.co.uk/up/concrete-barrier-type-m-block-photo.gif
http://cdn1.codziennypoznan.pl/201606241325/pub/img/full/71/1c58d-a9.jpg

Barriers with mapping as area allowed
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=wall
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dhedge


--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Arkhivna Street

[Andy Mabbett]

"This street has over a half-dozen names, all at once."

https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/arkhivna-street

Mapped here, but without all those names:

   https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/234767127

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] As Google Maps Renames Neighborhoods, Residents Fume - The New York Times

[Yves]

Time to choose a name of your choice for your own neighborhood in OSM, after 
all we are or close to be  the next authoritative source :) 
Yves 

Le 16 août 2018 16:40:06 GMT+02:00, Martin Koppenhoefer 
 a écrit :
>
>
>sent from a phone
>
>> On 16. Aug 2018, at 16:25, Maarten Deen  wrote:
>> 
>> This has been pointed out to Google many, many times (through their
>inadequate feedback tool and via Google employees) and has long been
>ignored. It has now been corrected
>
>
>don’t help them. The worse their errors are, the better for OSM. Let’s
>point people to OSM rather than help the Goog fix their data.
>
>Cheers,
>Martin 
>___
>talk mailing list
>talk@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas

[Tobias Knerr]

On 15.08.2018 20:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
> Currently, barrier=block is not allowed to be mapped as an area. As
> blocks can be big enough to map them as areas, I think it should be
> allowed, the same as in barrier=wall or barrier=hedge.

For routing purposes, barriers are usually connected to the highway=*
way somehow. When barriers are mapped as nodes, this is achieved by
tagging one of the way's nodes with the barrier tags.

How would we do this for barrier=block mapped as areas?

Note that the block(s) will not always be exactly on the centerline of
the highway, so we may not be able to even share a node between the area
outline and the highway way if we want to accurately represent the area
covered by the block. Due to this, I see no easy solution to map blocks
as areas while still making them topologically part of the routing network.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] State of the Map US Early Bird tickets end tomorrow!

[Bryan Housel]

A few quick reminders about... 
State of the Map US  🇺🇸  Detroit, MI · October 5-7th  


💸  The reduced-price tickets will be available until midnight tomorrow on 
Friday, August 17th.
Sign up today before the price doubles… 
https://2018.stateofthemap.us/ 

By the way if you are an OpenStreetMap US member, we just sent out a coupon 
code...
If you’re not an OpenStreetMap US member, join today to save some money on the 
conference!  
Visit this link to check or renew your membership: 
https://join.openstreetmap.us/ 


🎤  Check out full State of the Map US Program!
The program for State of the Map US is going to be amazing.  We're excited to 
have over 45 talks spread over 3 days in October so you can learn more from the 
OpenStreetMap US community!  There will also be workshops, social events, and 
hacking.
https://2018.stateofthemap.us/program/ 

Some highlights:
• Clifford Snow will be talkingabout OpenStreetMap in rural America.
• Julian Simioni will be talking about how to improve data for geocoding.
• Drishtie Patel will talk about Facebook's use of OpenStreetMap.

Follow State of the Map US on Twitter and share the latest news:  
https://twitter.com/sotmus 
Looking forward to seeing everyone in Detroit!! 

Bryan


P.S. Want to know what to expect?  Check out our pictures from previous years 
State of the Map US:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/openstreetmapus/albums 



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas

[Tomasz Wójcik]

An use case for allow mapping barrier=block as asreas is a better 
visualisation of a landcoverage. Mapping aeral objects as a nodes makes 
the map a little bit lied.


-- Wiadomość oryginalna --
Od: "Philip Barnes" 
Do: talk@openstreetmap.org; "David Fox" ; 
"Tomasz Wójcik" 

Data: 16.08.2018 10:05:11
Temat: Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas


Hedges can certainly be areas, some can be a few metres thick.

A common mapping scenario is a thick hedge and a stile at each side. 
The only way to represent this is to map as an area and map the stiles 
as nodes connected to the outline.


Phil (trigpoint)

On 16 August 2018 01:14:49 BST, David Fox  
wrote:
Barriers, by definition, provide some level of restriction. Without 
attaching them in some form it becomes hard for routers to account for 
them.

Hedges and walls are linear in nature, not an area.



On 15 August 2018, at 19:51, Tomasz Wójcik  wrote:


Currently, barrier=block is not allowed to be mapped as an area. As 
blocks can be big enough to map them as areas, I think it should be 
allowed, the same as in barrier=wall or barrier=hedge. Anyway, 
currently we have 3,9k of barrier=block areas in database.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dblock

Block examples:
http://www.concrete-barriers-blocks.co.uk/up/concrete-barrier-type-m-block-photo.gif
http://cdn1.codziennypoznan.pl/201606241325/pub/img/full/71/1c58d-a9.jpg

Barriers with mapping as area allowed
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=wall
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dhedge


--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Christoph Hormann]

> And we took the decision to use this info
> to spot rapidly the populated areas. «Take time» to look at these
> polygons one by one  (we did) and you will see that they reflect
> adequately the density of housing in these areas.

No, they don't (at least not for any meaningful definition of "density 
of housing").

In any case even if they did - iso-lines of some model of a building 
density field are quite fundamentally not something that is mappable in 
OSM, especially not with landuse=residential.

It seems i need to clarify one thing:  My harsh criticizm of the data 
imported (which i stand by firmly) is about the data.  I - just like 
probably everyone else here - am aware that clairedelune did not 
generate this data.  The kind of problem we see here is exactly the 
reason why we have import guidelines and why we need a directed editing 
policy so mappers do not get into a situation where they add bad data 
in larger volume because they follow - usually with good intentions - 
the unqualified instructions of others or wrongly believe the quality 
claims of data providers.

If the import plans had been properly discussed we could have had this 
discussion in advance and could have considered useful options - like 
for example the idea of impoting the buildings as Rory suggested.

I also want to make sure this example is not blown out of proportion.  
There are plenty of bad quality imports and bad mapping in OSM.  If you 
look at landuse=residential mapping in Eastern Africa this is not the 
worst data in the database, not by a large margin.  I just pointed it 
out here as an example because it was a perfect fit for the idea John 
brought up.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 16 August 2018, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> In a way, it's what we did in Western Europe when we only had Landsat
> imagery: "Uh, this looks like a settlement, let's draw a grey blob"

Absolutely not.

The settlement structure of Western Europe can be pretty accurately 
mapped from Landsat images.

What the data import linked to contains has no similarity to this.  And 
even if it did superficially this would be a pretend similarity because 
the settlement structure in this part of the world looks nothing like 
that of Western Europe.  This is just taking some auto-detected 
buildings, throwing some random algorithms at it and labeling the 
resulting abstract geometries landuse=residential.

Ironically if you did do a halfway reasonable classification of 
settlement areas in Landsat data for this area the result would 
probably be much more like a verifiable mapping of settlements in the 
area than what we can see now in the database.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Pierre Béland]

Claire who added these polygons  is a resident of DR Congo. She coordinated 
with me the North-Kivu OSM Response in 2012, coordinating with the UN agencies 
and NGO's in Kinshasa.  She is coordinator of OSM-DRC and coordinator of this 
OSM Response for the Ebola outbreak around Beni, working closely with the DRC 
ministry of health and the humanitarian NGO's. I do support Claire for this 
coordination and other OSM projects in DRC. And we took the decision to use 
this info to spot rapidly the populated areas. «Take time» to look at these 
polygons one by one  (we did) and you will see that they reflect adequately the 
density of housing in these areas.

In may, has Potentiel 3.0 just started to support OSM-DRC for the OpenCities 
project in Kinshasa, we collectively had to reorganize quickly and respond to 
the Ebola Oubreak. This second outbreak in august is in a different region. 
Each time, OSM-DRC volunteers accept to support the responses, to go in various 
towns and organize activies. This is a very dynamic OSM communty that know the 
field. 

Quality is very important for us and we started a project to use topological 
analysis to enhance the quality of OSM.  A first analysis based on the geometry 
of the buildings that I published last week on the hot lis was not commented 
except 1 answer. See 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/2018-August/014529.htmlhttps://opendatalabrdc.github.io/Blog/index.html#!Bulding_Geometry_Analysis_to_Support_OpenStreetMap_Quality_Analysis.md

Pursuing the analysis, I have identified buildings that cross roads or various 
other polygons and cleaned the data.  See 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61701721#map=12/-4.3993/15.3556
While we support this response, other OSM contributors in Kinshasa are 
organizing a 3 days Focus group for the OpenCities project with the 
neighborhood representatives to evaluate infrastructures at risk in case of 
outbreaks or floods.
See OpenStreetMap RDC on Twitter
 

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
OpenStreetMap RDC on Twitter

“Focus group avec représentants des quartiers, zones a risque d'inondation et 
d’érosion Kisenso et matete, Kins...
 |

 |

 |





| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Changeset: 61701721 | OpenStreetMap

OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.
 |

 |

 |



We are highly involved, volunteering for OSM and you should understand that we 
take some critics with a «a grain of salt».
But the contributor Christoph is going a bit far, insulting, expressing doubts 
about skills of OSM valuable volunteers that know the reality on the ground and 
respond in such difficult context. He should use less epithets, stop signing 
«Verifiability my ass...», clean it, realign his «idle thoughts» and make 
excuses to Claire.

Regard 
Pierre 
 

Le jeudi 16 août 2018 07 h 57 min 38 s HAE, Christoph Hormann 
 a écrit :  
 
 On Thursday 16 August 2018, Rory McCann wrote:
> What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
> comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight
> up import of the original building geometries would probably be (i)
> less contentious (since a building is a building is a building), and
> (ii) more accurate for calculating population figures (a use for
> building data for humanitarian purposes) and (iii) better for OSM
> since lots of buildings is better than landuse=residential polygons.

I found this peculiar as well - the most likely explanation seems to be 
that the quality of building detection and especially of building 
geometry generation (if that is being done at all) is probably quite 
bad and by not using the building data directly you can kind of 
disguise such deficits.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 16.08.2018 09:56, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61401087

Btw I have commented on this changeset. Apparently the main use case is
having a general indication of "there are people living here".

In a way, it's what we did in Western Europe when we only had Landsat
imagery: "Uh, this looks like a settlement, let's draw a grey blob" ;)

I guess it would look less silly if it had been created on a coarser
level. What we have here *suggests* precision due to the many nodes, but
in the end it's relatively random. Like if you specify the result of a
measurement as 4.35375423 when your error is +/- 1 ;)

A little buffering and simplifying would probably have been a sensible
idea. But then again, had they asked beforehand, it's possible that we
would have told them it's a bad idea to start with ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] As Google Maps Renames Neighborhoods, Residents Fume - The New York Times

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 16. Aug 2018, at 16:25, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> 
> This has been pointed out to Google many, many times (through their 
> inadequate feedback tool and via Google employees) and has long been ignored. 
> It has now been corrected


don’t help them. The worse their errors are, the better for OSM. Let’s point 
people to OSM rather than help the Goog fix their data.

Cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] As Google Maps Renames Neighborhoods, Residents Fume - The New York Times

[Maarten Deen]

On 2018-08-16 16:03, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

On 16.08.2018 13:06, Andy Mabbett wrote:

This may be of interest:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/technology/google-maps-neighborhood-names.html


Scary. Can we revert Google?


Google does not seem to take much responsibility. When you look at the 
dutch version of Google Maps, they have a lot of cities translated to 
what they think are names we use.

Some we do, some we don't. Or have never done.
For instance: Paris in dutch is Parijs and gets used a lot. An archaich 
name for Ljubljana is Laibach and was mostly used in germanic countries, 
but never really used in the Netherlands. Guess what Google chooses to 
show dutch users of Google Maps when they look at Ljubljana.
This has been pointed out to Google many, many times (through their 
inadequate feedback tool and via Google employees) and has long been 
ignored. It has now been corrected, as well as the nearby town of 
Marburg an der Drau, but in Northern France we still see Sint-Omaars, 
Ariën-aan-de-Leie en Dowaai.


And sometimes they make really stupid translations. The Dutch town of 
Balk is translated to Balke in German and Beam in English. Yes, that is 
the correct translation for the technical structure, but no sane person 
would use that for the town's name and it has never been an official 
translation.


Regards,
Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] As Google Maps Renames Neighborhoods, Residents Fume - The New York Times

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 16.08.2018 13:06, Andy Mabbett wrote:

This may be of interest:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/technology/google-maps-neighborhood-names.html 


Scary. Can we revert Google?

tom

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Andy Townsend]

On 16/08/2018 12:35, Rory McCann wrote:

What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight up
import of the original building geometries would probably be (i) less
contentious (since a building is a building is a building)


I think the problem here is that "a building is a building is a 
building" isn't really true.  There are many different kinds of 
structures in many different parts of the world, and many different 
light conditions, and different ground surfaces.


We saw this problem with the Facebook "roads import" in Egypt - whatever 
software they were using was detected many sharp edges in imagery 
(walls, canals, etc.) as roads.  If you train whatever you're using to 
detect stuff in one environment and try and use it in another 
environment it's going to get things wrong in unpredictable ways, and 
that's not really going to be obvious if you then (as here) estimate 
residential areas based on extracted buildings.  I can, however, see the 
sense of trying to do that (estimate residential areas based on 
extracted buildings) - in some areas actual buildings are likely to be 
ephemeral, but usage of areas not so much.


Best Regards,

Andy




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [test] Customized Taginfo : 620 areas - every country and some new experimental features ( ~ 1 week test )

[Frédéric Rodrigo]

Hello,

It's an impressive job. It can really help.
Just a note about France, you split France on admin_level=6, this result 
on around 100 pieces, it does not make sens. For France admin_level=4 is 
the only right level of sub area.


Like for France or other countries, sub levels is interesting but the 
country as a whole also..


Frédéric.


Le 14/08/2018 à 20:26, Imre Samu a écrit :
This is a Proof of Concept of my vision [ customizing taginfo for 
countries, regions ]

in my experience - It can be useful for finding local tagging errors.


dev site: http://taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu 
 find your area/country

1 week test:   shutdown time: *~ 2018-aug-20 ( GMT 23:00h )*


Main changes:

*-  620 areas  - not refreshing *
      = 620 docker services running in a simple cloud machine.
                    32Gb RAM,   slow CPU :  Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU  
C2750  @ 2.40GHz,   8 core ,  ~ 600Gb Disk )


*-  2 new experimental reports*:

      "QA-Normalized name differences (Experimental)"
            example: 
http://eu-at.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/reports/normalized_names
            The result can be download as an xlsx file: 
http://eu-at.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/download/normalized_names.xlsx


            ( I hope - this will be useful for the localized 
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index
                     ( see 
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/issues/11 )



      "QA-Problematic tags (Experimental)"     [ still a lot of bugs,  
 for example:  checking access type of tags  is not perfect yet, sorry ]
             example: 
http://eu-at.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/reports/problematic_tags
             .xlsx result: 
http://eu-at.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/download/problematic_tags.xlsx


*- `name` support for tags  ( Experimental ) *

     examples:
     Spain   amenity=place_of_worship     ( names in Spanish  + Català 
(ca), Galego (ga) and Euskera (eu) )
         name       = 
http://eu-es.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=place_of_worship#tagnames_lang1
         name:es  = 
http://eu-es.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=place_of_worship#tagnames_lang2
         name:eu  = 
http://eu-es.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=place_of_worship#tagnames_lang3
         name:ca  = 
http://eu-es.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=place_of_worship#tagnames_lang4
         name:gl   = 
http://eu-es.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=place_of_worship#tagnames_lang5



       or Switzerland   amenity=bank
         name       = 
http://eu-ch.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=bank#tagnames_lang1
         name:en  = 
http://eu-ch.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=bank#tagnames_lang2
         name:de  = 
http://eu-ch.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=bank#tagnames_lang3
         name:fr    = 
http://eu-ch.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=bank#tagnames_lang4
         name:it    = 
http://eu-ch.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=bank#tagnames_lang5
      the "name:*" tags configured on the 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names info but not 
perfect yet.


      so "Belgium has three official languages (Dutch, French and 
German) "    so the *amenity=pub * names is:
       name     = 
http://eu-be.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=pub#tagnames_lang1
       name:fr  = 
http://eu-be.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=pub#tagnames_lang2
       name:nl = 
http://eu-be.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=pub#tagnames_lang3
       name:en = 
http://eu-be.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=pub#tagnames_lang4
       name:de = 
http://eu-be.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=pub#tagnames_lang5
     or in Ireland (Republic )  -  amenity=pub  names  in a Gaeltacht 
(name:ga)  : 
http://eu-ie.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=pub#tagnames_lang3


      It is interesting for checking in your area the tag"names" of    
*=yes  tags -  some of them easy to fix.
       * shop=yes  ;  amenity=yes   ;    man_made=yes ; natural=yes 
; sport=yes  ; leisure=yes


          amenity=yes  in the UK ( 
http://eu-gb.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/amenity=yes#tagnames_lang1 )
          shop=yes       in the UK ( 
http://eu-gb.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/tags/shop=yes#tagnames_lang1 )


*
*
*Housenumbers ...*

 It is interesting for me - checking the frequent 
* addr**:**housenumber *  values.


 In Taiwan ( 
http://as-tw.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/keys/addr%3Ahousenumber#values 
)    not so much  number "4"
 compare to european countries ...   (  hint: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraphobia )
 in Switzerland - check the 13   :)   ( 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskaidekaphobia )

http://eu-ch.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/keys/addr%3Ahousenumber#values

The South America - has a different frequent housenumbers - compare to 
Europe:


Argentina  :  TOP3   199,201,200 :
http://sa-ar.taginfo-dev.opengeodata.hu/keys/addr%3Ahousenumber#values
Peru :           TOP3  

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 16 August 2018, Rory McCann wrote:
> What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
> comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight
> up import of the original building geometries would probably be (i)
> less contentious (since a building is a building is a building), and
> (ii) more accurate for calculating population figures (a use for
> building data for humanitarian purposes) and (iii) better for OSM
> since lots of buildings is better than landuse=residential polygons.

I found this peculiar as well - the most likely explanation seems to be 
that the quality of building detection and especially of building 
geometry generation (if that is being done at all) is probably quite 
bad and by not using the building data directly you can kind of 
disguise such deficits.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Rory McCann]

What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight up
import of the original building geometries would probably be (i) less
contentious (since a building is a building is a building), and (ii)
more accurate for calculating population figures (a use for building
data for humanitarian purposes) and (iii) better for OSM since lots of
buildings is better than landuse=residential polygons.

Sometimes people can try to be *too* clever. 🙂

On 16/08/18 13:16, Christoph Hormann wrote:

On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:


Satellite imagery is available for the world..
But how much do you know of Africa?
[...]


You maybe don't realize that but the kind of data garbage i pointed to
is the direct result of projecting ideas and experiences of settlement
structures of some part of the world onto a different one. We are
mostly talking about scattered dwellings of what are probably mostly
subsistence farmers here.  The pointless polygon geometry drawing is
the failed attempt to regard those as a typical European/North American
residential area.

If this is due to a lack of knowledge about the actual geography or
because of a misguided belief that making it crudely look a bit like an
European/North American residential area is kind of beneficial for the
people there i don't know.

Anyway we are drifting off-topic here and this does not really help the
original question from John.  My answer to that would be:  Yes,
automated methods can help to find unmapped settlements in OSM - less
though in actually mapping them.




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:
>
> Satellite imagery is available for the world..
> But how much do you know of Africa?
> [...]

You maybe don't realize that but the kind of data garbage i pointed to 
is the direct result of projecting ideas and experiences of settlement 
structures of some part of the world onto a different one. We are 
mostly talking about scattered dwellings of what are probably mostly 
subsistence farmers here.  The pointless polygon geometry drawing is 
the failed attempt to regard those as a typical European/North American 
residential area.  

If this is due to a lack of knowledge about the actual geography or 
because of a misguided belief that making it crudely look a bit like an 
European/North American residential area is kind of beneficial for the 
people there i don't know.

Anyway we are drifting off-topic here and this does not really help the 
original question from John.  My answer to that would be:  Yes, 
automated methods can help to find unmapped settlements in OSM - less 
though in actually mapping them.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] As Google Maps Renames Neighborhoods, Residents Fume - The New York Times

[Andy Mabbett]

This may be of interest:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/technology/google-maps-
neighborhood-names.html

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Warin]

On 16/08/18 19:26, Christoph Hormann wrote:

On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:

As that particular mapper has local knowledge on their side I'd not
challenge them.

Why not?

I would love to see some ground level or aerial/satellite images
documenting the verifiability of those outlines.

The good thing about verifiability and the core of OpenStreetMap in
general is that you don't have to trust some imagined authority about
the data, you can independently verify it.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume in such cases
they are just ignorant of these principles or do not get why they are
important but with organized efforts like this i can't help but get the
impression there is a certain amount of malice to sabotage or at least
an excessive amount of carelessness.


Satellite imagery is available for the world..
But how much do you know of Africa?

A residential area in Germany or Australia is very different from one in rural 
Africa or Asia.
A residential house/home is also very different ..
A fuel station in Africa can be signified by PET bottles strung up in a tree.. 
or on a fence.
and the fuel comes in those same PET bottles ... no 'gas pumps'. But you get 
your fuel.
We should not be imposing our standards on them, but rather accept their 
interpretation of what is a house, what is residential, etc.

I would not like to go to that particular area of the world to get ground truth 
...
Western CDR ok .. eastern .. ummm ... no thanks.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:
>
> As that particular mapper has local knowledge on their side I'd not
> challenge them.

Why not?

I would love to see some ground level or aerial/satellite images 
documenting the verifiability of those outlines.

The good thing about verifiability and the core of OpenStreetMap in 
general is that you don't have to trust some imagined authority about 
the data, you can independently verify it.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume in such cases 
they are just ignorant of these principles or do not get why they are 
important but with organized efforts like this i can't help but get the 
impression there is a certain amount of malice to sabotage or at least 
an excessive amount of carelessness.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Warin]

On 16/08/18 17:56, Christoph Hormann wrote:

On Thursday 16 August 2018, john whelan wrote:

Could this be used to detect villages and towns which have not yet
been mapped.

If something could drop some sort of marker where it thinks a cluster
of buildings are then we could use overpass to pull them into JOSM
and map them as places, landuse=residential, village or whatever.

As you might already imagine reality is way ahead of you - for example
someone has recently been dumping a whole bunch of garbage exactly like
this in eastern Congo:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61401087
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/614459980

 From a purely technical point of view if it wasn't littering OSM this
would just be droll.

Verifiability my ass...



Sigh.

I suppose if you want to see blank areas of the map you'll have to look 
for the deserts .. (including the polar caps). Oh .. and oceans too.



As that particular mapper has local knowledge on their side I'd not 
challenge them.


Though a change set of close to 2,000 ways does look a bit large.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas

[Philip Barnes]

Hedges can certainly be areas, some can be a few metres thick.

A common mapping scenario is a thick hedge and a stile at each side. The only 
way to represent this is to map as an area and map the stiles as nodes 
connected to the outline.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 16 August 2018 01:14:49 BST, David Fox  wrote:
>Barriers, by definition, provide some level of restriction. Without
>attaching them in some form it becomes hard for routers to account for
>them.
>Hedges and walls are linear in nature, not an area.
>
>On 15 August 2018, at 19:51, Tomasz Wójcik  wrote:
>
>
>
>Currently, barrier=block is not allowed to be mapped as an area. As
>blocks can be big enough to map them as areas, I think it should be
>allowed, the same as in barrier=wall or barrier=hedge. Anyway,
>currently we have 3,9k of barrier=block areas in database.
>
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dblock
>
>
>Block examples:
>
>http://www.concrete-barriers-blocks.co.uk/up/concrete-barrier-type-m-block-photo.gif
>
>http://cdn1.codziennypoznan.pl/201606241325/pub/img/full/71/1c58d-a9.jpg
>
>
>Barriers with mapping as area allowed
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=wall 
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dhedge

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas

[_ dikkeknodel]

Hi Tomasz,

Could you elaborate on what would be the use-case for this approach and why 
that is relevant? At the moment I do not see the relevance for mappnig them as 
an area.

Cheers,
dikkenodel




Van: Yves 
Verzonden: Thursday, August 16, 2018 8:20:59 AM
Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas

Being a closed way with area=yes does not mean they aren't connected to the 
underlying ways: I don't think router be bothered by this.
Yves

Le 16 août 2018 02:14:49 GMT+02:00, David Fox  a 
écrit :

Barriers, by definition, provide some level of restriction. Without attaching 
them in some form it becomes hard for routers to account for them.
Hedges and walls are linear in nature, not an area.


On 15 August 2018, at 19:51, Tomasz Wójcik  wrote:


Currently, barrier=block is not allowed to be mapped as an area. As blocks can 
be big enough to map them as areas, I think it should be allowed, the same as 
in barrier=wall or barrier=hedge. Anyway, currently we have 3,9k of 
barrier=block areas in database.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dblock

Block examples:
http://www.concrete-barriers-blocks.co.uk/up/concrete-barrier-type-m-block-photo.gif
http://cdn1.codziennypoznan.pl/201606241325/pub/img/full/71/1c58d-a9.jpg

Barriers with mapping as area allowed
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=wall
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dhedge
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 16 August 2018, john whelan wrote:
> Could this be used to detect villages and towns which have not yet
> been mapped.
>
> If something could drop some sort of marker where it thinks a cluster
> of buildings are then we could use overpass to pull them into JOSM
> and map them as places, landuse=residential, village or whatever.

As you might already imagine reality is way ahead of you - for example 
someone has recently been dumping a whole bunch of garbage exactly like 
this in eastern Congo:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61401087
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/614459980

From a purely technical point of view if it wasn't littering OSM this 
would just be droll.

Verifiability my ass...

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk