Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 5 Jan 2016, at 12:29, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
> John Doe  wrote:
> 
>> I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
>> abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
>> search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
>> appears on mapnik.
>> Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
> 
> "I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> abandoned:building=yes"
> 
> I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things like
> shops where there is a fundamental difference between active shop (POI
> - it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).
> 
> abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.
> 
> In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference between
> used and unused one.
> 

Where a shop has closed and all the fittings removed, usually ready for a new 
shop to move in, I use shop=vacant, and where appropriate building=retail.

I would only use an abandoned tag where the building is run down and would need 
significant repairs to bring back into use, or possibly where there have been 
squatters or it's falling down. Abandoned is a rather strong word to use.

Shaun


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[John Doe]

Ok i agree, the rendering is not so important and i can use other tools,
but why i can't search abandoned stuff with nominatim? this is not so logic
in my opinion. If the data is present why i can't find it with a regular
search on openstreetmap.org for example? this is not a rendering problem.
Il 06/Gen/2016 06:40, "Marc Gemis"  ha scritto:

> As soon as you record the data it is in the database, it doesn't
> matter whether it is rendered on the standard map or not.
> I think that if you need "stats" on abandoned buildings or shops, that
> you will load the data into your own database or a GIS system such as
> QGIS, where you can really analyse and visualise the data.
> Another quick solution for visualisation would be to use Overpass
> Turbo or Overpass in combination with umap.  No need to wait until
> others do the work for you :-)
>
>
> regards
>
> m
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:42 PM, John Doe  wrote:
> > In my opinion objects with abandoned prefix should be introduced in
> > nominatim for searches and in mapnik to see them (with a different render
> > obviously).
> > OSM can be an important database also for stats about abandoned
> > buildings/houses in our cities.
> > Some organization (also the public administration) can be interested in
> > research and exploitation of these places and OSM can be a great base.
> >
> > Il 05/Gen/2016 13:29, "Mateusz Konieczny"  ha
> scritto:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
> >> John Doe  wrote:
> >>
> >> > I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> >> > abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
> >> > search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
> >> > appears on mapnik.
> >> > Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
> >>
> >> "I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> >> abandoned:building=yes"
> >>
> >> I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things like
> >> shops where there is a fundamental difference between active shop (POI
> >> - it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).
> >>
> >> abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.
> >>
> >> In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference between
> >> used and unused one.
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Abandoned buildings

[Simon Poole]

Nominatim is not a general purpose OSM search API (overpass however is),
it is built around the notion of creating address hierarchies of
(correct) OSM data for the purpose of geocoding and reverse geocoding.
It has some support for interesting POIs, but abandoned buildings are
not really of general interest.

In any case I'm not quite sure what your issue with using overpass is?

Simon

Am 06.01.2016 um 12:02 schrieb John Doe:
>
> Ok i agree, the rendering is not so important and i can use other
> tools, but why i can't search abandoned stuff with nominatim? this is
> not so logic in my opinion. If the data is present why i can't find it
> with a regular search on openstreetmap.org 
> for example? this is not a rendering problem.
>
> Il 06/Gen/2016 06:40, "Marc Gemis"  > ha scritto:
>
> As soon as you record the data it is in the database, it doesn't
> matter whether it is rendered on the standard map or not.
> I think that if you need "stats" on abandoned buildings or shops, that
> you will load the data into your own database or a GIS system such as
> QGIS, where you can really analyse and visualise the data.
> Another quick solution for visualisation would be to use Overpass
> Turbo or Overpass in combination with umap.  No need to wait until
> others do the work for you :-)
>
>
> regards
>
> m
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:42 PM, John Doe  > wrote:
> > In my opinion objects with abandoned prefix should be introduced in
> > nominatim for searches and in mapnik to see them (with a
> different render
> > obviously).
> > OSM can be an important database also for stats about abandoned
> > buildings/houses in our cities.
> > Some organization (also the public administration) can be
> interested in
> > research and exploitation of these places and OSM can be a great
> base.
> >
> > Il 05/Gen/2016 13:29, "Mateusz Konieczny"  > ha scritto:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
> >> John Doe >
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> >> > abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but
> now i can't
> >> > search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
> >> > appears on mapnik.
> >> > Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
> >>
> >> "I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> >> abandoned:building=yes"
> >>
> >> I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things
> like
> >> shops where there is a fundamental difference between active
> shop (POI
> >> - it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).
> >>
> >> abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.
> >>
> >> In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference
> between
> >> used and unused one.
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org 
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Andy Townsend]

On 04/01/2016 23:14, John Doe wrote:


I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with 
abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't 
search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these 
appears on mapnik.

Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?




With regard to the tagging, a link to the actual area (and maybe a photo 
of the actual building) would help, and (in case you're not aware) 
there's a "tagging" mailing list 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/ that discusses such 
things.  Obviously I realise you're actually asking about searching not 
tagging; just mentioning in case it's useful...


Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[John Doe]

The problem is not mine; i'm just searching a solution for casual/potential
OSM users.
Fot example i mapped some really interesting abandoned old house (in
italian i mean "villa" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa), currently
not yet recognized as historical heritage, that is object of study of
researchers in my native city; a student or researcher or just a curious
can be interested to search one of these places; on openstreetmap.org (the
well known OSM reference) they can't so there is an high probability that
they will use "other maps".
Nominatim is not a general purpose OSM search API (overpass however is), it
is built around the notion of creating address hierarchies of (correct) OSM
data for the purpose of geocoding and reverse geocoding. It has some
support for interesting POIs, but abandoned buildings are not really of
general interest.

In any case I'm not quite sure what your issue with using overpass is?

Simon

Am 06.01.2016 um 12:02 schrieb John Doe:

Ok i agree, the rendering is not so important and i can use other tools,
but why i can't search abandoned stuff with nominatim? this is not so logic
in my opinion. If the data is present why i can't find it with a regular
search on openstreetmap.org for example? this is not a rendering problem.
Il 06/Gen/2016 06:40, "Marc Gemis"  ha scritto:

> As soon as you record the data it is in the database, it doesn't
> matter whether it is rendered on the standard map or not.
> I think that if you need "stats" on abandoned buildings or shops, that
> you will load the data into your own database or a GIS system such as
> QGIS, where you can really analyse and visualise the data.
> Another quick solution for visualisation would be to use Overpass
> Turbo or Overpass in combination with umap.  No need to wait until
> others do the work for you :-)
>
>
> regards
>
> m
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:42 PM, John Doe  wrote:
> > In my opinion objects with abandoned prefix should be introduced in
> > nominatim for searches and in mapnik to see them (with a different render
> > obviously).
> > OSM can be an important database also for stats about abandoned
> > buildings/houses in our cities.
> > Some organization (also the public administration) can be interested in
> > research and exploitation of these places and OSM can be a great base.
> >
> > Il 05/Gen/2016 13:29, "Mateusz Konieczny"  ha
> scritto:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
> >> John Doe  wrote:
> >>
> >> > I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> >> > abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
> >> > search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
> >> > appears on mapnik.
> >> > Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
> >>
> >> "I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> >> abandoned:building=yes"
> >>
> >> I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things like
> >> shops where there is a fundamental difference between active shop (POI
> >> - it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).
> >>
> >> abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.
> >>
> >> In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference between
> >> used and unused one.
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
>


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 06.01.2016 um 12:59 schrieb Shaun McDonald :
> 
> Where a shop has closed and all the fittings removed, usually ready for a new 
> shop to move in, I use shop=vacant, and where appropriate building=retail.


shop=vacant seems a bit of a hack, "vacant" is not a shop type. You would 
better use a dedicated tag for this, e.g. vacant_shop=yes

I agree with building=building type though.

> 
> I would only use an abandoned tag where the building is run down and would 
> need significant repairs to bring back into use, or possibly where there have 
> been squatters or it's falling down. Abandoned is a rather strong word to use.


+1

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

Am 06.01.2016 um 15:55 schrieb Andy Townsend :

>> You would better use a dedicated tag for this, e.g. vacant_shop=yes
> 
> Now you're just making it up as you're going along* :)  No uses in OSM, though


yes, sorry for not being more explicit, that wasn't meant as an actual example, 
my suggestion would be disused:shop=yes/*
(the * stands for the shop type that was there before it closed, and which is 
quite often still visible also afterwards)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Andy Townsend]

On 06/01/2016 13:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
shop=vacant seems a bit of a hack, "vacant" is not a shop type. 


That's debateable, I'd say it was.  "disused:shop=blah" (or "yes") would 
work too and is used, though not nearly as many as shop=vacant (9k vs 2k 
for http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=disused%3Ashop ).


You would better use a dedicated tag for this, e.g. vacant_shop=yes 


Now you're just making it up as you're going along* :)  No uses in OSM, 
though


http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=vacant_shop%3Dyes

finds 8 shop:vacant=yes.

Cheers,

Andy

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FvoXJCrBhQ

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 05.01.2016 um 00:31 schrieb Nicolás Alvarez :
> 
> but an
> abandoned building is still a building, so maybe building=yes
> abandoned=yes does fit


I see it similarly, an abandoned building that is more or less in a usable 
state is still a building. Generally there are also other prefixes, e.g. 
disused which is less strong than abandoned, but in the case of a temporarily 
unused building I'd stick with building =yes.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[John Doe]

In my opinion objects with abandoned prefix should be introduced in
nominatim for searches and in mapnik to see them (with a different render
obviously).
OSM can be an important database also for stats about abandoned
buildings/houses in our cities.
Some organization (also the public administration) can be interested in
research and exploitation of these places and OSM can be a great base.
Il 05/Gen/2016 13:29, "Mateusz Konieczny"  ha scritto:

> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
> John Doe  wrote:
>
> > I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> > abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
> > search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
> > appears on mapnik.
> > Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
>
> "I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> abandoned:building=yes"
>
> I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things like
> shops where there is a fundamental difference between active shop (POI
> - it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).
>
> abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.
>
> In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference between
> used and unused one.
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Marc Gemis]

As soon as you record the data it is in the database, it doesn't
matter whether it is rendered on the standard map or not.
I think that if you need "stats" on abandoned buildings or shops, that
you will load the data into your own database or a GIS system such as
QGIS, where you can really analyse and visualise the data.
Another quick solution for visualisation would be to use Overpass
Turbo or Overpass in combination with umap.  No need to wait until
others do the work for you :-)


regards

m

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:42 PM, John Doe  wrote:
> In my opinion objects with abandoned prefix should be introduced in
> nominatim for searches and in mapnik to see them (with a different render
> obviously).
> OSM can be an important database also for stats about abandoned
> buildings/houses in our cities.
> Some organization (also the public administration) can be interested in
> research and exploitation of these places and OSM can be a great base.
>
> Il 05/Gen/2016 13:29, "Mateusz Konieczny"  ha scritto:
>>
>> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
>> John Doe  wrote:
>>
>> > I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
>> > abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
>> > search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
>> > appears on mapnik.
>> > Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
>>
>> "I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
>> abandoned:building=yes"
>>
>> I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things like
>> shops where there is a fundamental difference between active shop (POI
>> - it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).
>>
>> abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.
>>
>> In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference between
>> used and unused one.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Abandoned buildings

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:14:25 +0100
John Doe  wrote:

> I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
> search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these
> appears on mapnik.
> Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?

"I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
abandoned:building=yes"

I think it is mistake. abandoned: prefix makes sense for things like
shops where there is a fundamental difference between active shop (POI
- it is possible to buy something there or provides some services).

abandoned:shop, abandoned:amenity is solely an orientation point.

In case of buildings there is no such fundamental difference between
used and unused one.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Marcos Oliveira]

>
> Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
>

Yep.

The issue is that Nominatim nor the default osm-carto acknowledges the tag
abandoned:building=yes at the moment, so that's the reason neither appear
on your searches.

Try adding a building=yes to the feature. Probably it's tagging for the
renderer but it should appear on your queries that way.

2016-01-04 23:14 GMT+00:00 John Doe :

> I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
> search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these appears on
> mapnik.
> Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
Um Abraço,
Marcos Oliveira
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned buildings

[Nicolás Alvarez]

2016-01-04 20:14 GMT-03:00 John Doe :
> I tagged some abandoned building in my native city with
> abandoned:building=yes (as wiki) and the building name but now i can't
> search these ones with nominatim (no results) and none of these appears on
> mapnik.
> Is prefix abandoned before building=yes really correct?
>

Keep in mind that the whole idea of the "abandoned:" prefix is
programs should only find them if they were explicitly designed to do
so.

For example, if you tag an abandoned gas station as amenity=fuel
abandoned=yes, any software that doesn't know about abandoned= will
think it's a working gas station, it will appear in searches, apps
will tell drivers that there is a gas station nearby, etc. It's better
to tag it as abandoned:amenity=fuel so that any existing software will
take it as an unknown tag and ignore it. If any software wants to show
abandoned gas stations in a different way, eg. as a reference point,
it can have an explicit rule for the tag.

But I'm not sure about building. An abandoned restaurant is not a
restaurant anymore (in the sense that you can't eat there), but an
abandoned building is still a building, so maybe building=yes
abandoned=yes does fit... Or maybe the map should render
abandoned:building.

-- 
Nicolás

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