Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
2009/9/21 Anthony : > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Apollinaris Schoell >> problem is how can you convert the weekly updates into osm updates? You >> can't delete all data and upload again the next week. > > I'm not volunteering to do it *weekly*, but I'd only delete and upload (or > modify) the data that changes, of course :). Provided each parcel has a unique id in the imported dataset, it should be possible to automate these updates although there's no standard way in OSM yet to do automatic updates for imported data, that I know of. There is however at least one example of this being done, for the German localities and there's a smart scheme of tags that tell the updater which properties should and which shouldn't be updated. This prevents the situation where, say, one person comes and adds a note= tag or the wikipedia= tag to one of the imported objects and its changeset id changes (or the reviewed=no tag is removed) and the object never gets updated with official information again. > >>> I basically just want the address info. Having the parcel polygons is a >>> bonus, but if it proves to be too difficult to maintain I could just move >>> the data to the ways as an interpolation. >> >> just address data seems reasonable. It shouldn't change that much and >> easier to maintain. > > I'll see how much the polygon data has changed since the data I downloaded a > month ago. I would think the main changes to the parts that I'm importing > (not property values and all that stuff) would be when new subdivisions are > added, which would affect address data as well, and affects the Tiger data > too. That and use changes (e.g. residential to commercial), but use changes > are easy to update automagically and without human intervention. > > I could do this as point data. I could merge the parcel polygons into block > polygons to cut down on the number of polygons by an order of magnitude or > so. It'd be nice to at least see the block lines. It's great seeing the > cul-de-sacs and curved corners tracing out the gaps in the roads. > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Hillsman, Edward > wrote: >> >> Hi Anthony, >> >> One other possibility would be to calculate and upload parcel centroids >> (points) instead of whole parcels. > > Yep. Or if I have the patience I could identify the road the address is on > and put the point a few meters off the road in the center of the lot line > parallel to the road, this way long lots would look better. > > But then, if I'm going to that, I might as well just add the info to the way > as interpolation data, right? Yes, but obviously a node in the middle of the parcel, instead of a few meters off the road is closer to truth and a full polygon is still closer. So I'd personally just import the polygons, otherwise someone will come and draw them manually eventually and they'll be less correct. > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Apollinaris Schoell > wrote: >> >> adding a tag like [hcparcel:verified=no] is useless. > > Okay, I won't do that. :) > >> another suggestion. don't make the same mistake as tiger, Massgis, PGS >> coastline ... imports and tag individual nodes if they are members of a way. > > I can't imagine any reason I'd do that. :) > >> >> don't add too many tags which have no use for osm and can be easily looked >> up in the source data. The uses tomorrow will be completely different than the uses you can imagine today. Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
> problem is how can you convert the weekly updates into osm updates? You >> can't delete all data and upload again the next week. >> > > I'm not volunteering to do it *weekly*, but I'd only delete and upload (or > modify) the data that changes, of course :). > great if you can do that. but be warned it can be lot of work if you don't have a toolchain to automate most steps. > >> also consider to add some less useful tags to the changeset instead. >> > > Which ones? > > if you can't think of any then there will be no use case for it. :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Anthony wrote: > I'm not volunteering to do it *weekly*, but I'd only delete and upload (or > modify) the data that changes, of course :). Even that may be a challange. The ways may get edited between your uploads. You'll want to be ready for that. -- - Joseph Scanlan +1-702-455-3679 http://www.n7xsd.us/ j...@co.clark.nv.us (work) (not work) n7...@arrl.net - So he went inside there to take on what he found. But he never escaped them, for who can escape what he desires? --Tony Banks of Genesis in "The Lady Lies" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: > > This data is definitely very up-to-date. It is used by the county to >> impose property taxes, so it has to be up-to-date. They offer new files >> weekly. >> > > problem is how can you convert the weekly updates into osm updates? You > can't delete all data and upload again the next week. > I'm not volunteering to do it *weekly*, but I'd only delete and upload (or modify) the data that changes, of course :). I basically just want the address info. Having the parcel polygons is a >> bonus, but if it proves to be too difficult to maintain I could just move >> the data to the ways as an interpolation. >> > > just address data seems reasonable. It shouldn't change that much and > easier to maintain. > I'll see how much the polygon data has changed since the data I downloaded a month ago. I would think the main changes to the parts that I'm importing (not property values and all that stuff) would be when new subdivisions are added, which would affect address data as well, and affects the Tiger data too. That and use changes (e.g. residential to commercial), but use changes are easy to update automagically and without human intervention. I could do this as point data. I could merge the parcel polygons into block polygons to cut down on the number of polygons by an order of magnitude or so. It'd be nice to at least see the block lines. It's great seeing the cul-de-sacs and curved corners tracing out the gaps in the roads. On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: > Hi Anthony, > > One other possibility would be to calculate and upload parcel centroids > (points) instead of whole parcels. Yep. Or if I have the patience I could identify the road the address is on and put the point a few meters off the road in the center of the lot line parallel to the road, this way long lots would look better. But then, if I'm going to that, I might as well just add the info to the way as interpolation data, right? On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: > adding a tag like [hcparcel:verified=no] is useless. > Okay, I won't do that. :) another suggestion. don't make the same mistake as tiger, Massgis, PGS > coastline ... imports and tag individual nodes if they are members of a way. > I can't imagine any reason I'd do that. :) > don't add too many tags which have no use for osm and can be easily looked > up in the source data. > Yep, I'm thinking addr:housenumber, addr:street, landuse=residential, and let people look up the rest using proptax_folio_numb=*. But I'm leaning toward using point data for the addrs and polygons for the blocks (any polygons which touch and have the same landuse would be merged). Maybe I don't even need the proptax_folio_numb? That could be looked up given the housenumber and street anyway, I guess. > also consider to add some less useful tags to the changeset instead. > Which ones? I'm doing a test import on a nearby neighborhood (maybe 500 houses?) before I move to the whole county. I'll post on here after that, and give a few days for more suggestions/objections. And as of yet I still haven't figured out all the technical details, so there's time before even that happens. Maybe I'll only do a few neighborhoods at a time until I'm sure I can maintain everything. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
Hi Anthony, One other possibility would be to calculate and upload parcel centroids (points) instead of whole parcels. Someone has done something like this for the City of Albuquerque, New Mexico (as far as I can tell, it's almost the only work that has been done with the data in that are). I stumbled onto this when I did a bit of mapping from a short visit there in August. If you go to edit view, you will see POIs for what appears to be each parcel, with an address. The source tags suggest this probably came from the City of Albquerque's city GIS database. Ed Hillsman -- Message: 5 Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:54:36 -0400 From: Anthony Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data To: Pieren Cc: openstreetmap Message-ID: <71cd4dd90909211054h69662471q6b3deb465fce1...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Pieren wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Anthony wrote: > Hi Antony, > > Here in France, we also have access to the land registry WMS for the > whole country (only raster images, not the shapefiles excepted for one > "county" who released also the parcels as shapefiles). > We use this source for buildings, street names and addresses but the > data are not always up-to-date. This data is definitely very up-to-date. It is used by the county to impose property taxes, so it has to be up-to-date. They offer new files weekly. But I can only speak for my country. I can understand the temptation > to import everything when you have a bunch of geodata available but > ask yourself if it is really valuable for OSM (I don't have the > answer). > I basically just want the address info. Having the parcel polygons is a bonus, but if it proves to be too difficult to maintain I could just move the data to the ways as an interpolation. Also, remember, keeping all of France (population 61 million) up to date is much harder than keeping Hillsborough County, Florida (population 1 million) up to date :). I don't know, I hope I can run a script regularly to provide a list of changes, and take it from there. But worst case scenario I guess I can just remove everything. Which gives me an idea. I guess I should add a hcparcel:verified=no tag to everything I import. On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Anthony wrote: > >> Any other suggestions? Objections? >> > > Just my usual one: Please make sure that where you have polygons sharing a > common border, create an individual way in OSM for this border and use a > multipolygon relation for each of the neighbouring parcels so that they may > share the same way and nodes, rather than importing two sets of nodes on top > of each other (one for parcel A, the other for parcel B). Thanks. I was planning on matching up the shared nodes (they are duplicated in the source data), but I didn't realize you could create a shared way. I'll figure out how to do that before the import. Good suggestion. This leads me to a question. If I mark the addr:housenumber on the multipolygon relation (that's where it would go, right?), will that show up on the map in the two main renderers? Or should I add a node for this? -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090921/296cf 538/attachment-0001.htm -- Message: 6 Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:56:21 -0400 From: Anthony Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data To: openstreetmap Message-ID: <71cd4dd90909211056y6f526ffcpd34a834704fac...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Anthony wrote: > I basically just want the address info. > One of these days I want to be able to get door-to-door driving directions which I can *correct* when they're wrong! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
> This data is definitely very up-to-date. It is used by the county to > impose property taxes, so it has to be up-to-date. They offer new files > weekly. > problem is how can you convert the weekly updates into osm updates? You can't delete all data and upload again the next week. > > I basically just want the address info. Having the parcel polygons is a > bonus, but if it proves to be too difficult to maintain I could just move > the data to the ways as an interpolation. > > just address data seems reasonable. It shouldn't change that much and easier to maintain. > > I don't know, I hope I can run a script regularly to provide a list of > changes, and take it from there. But worst case scenario I guess I can just > remove everything. Which gives me an idea. I guess I should add a > hcparcel:verified=no tag to everything I import. > > adding a tag like that is useless. everyone can change tags but doesn't have to when data is changed. It has zero information value as soon as others work on the data. same problem with tiger_reviewed=no some mappers use it others don't. any way modified if kind of reviewed but no one can tell how much of a review was done. If you need anything locked add a tag to a changeset. this can't be changed. > > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > >> Anthony wrote: >> >>> Any other suggestions? Objections? >>> >> >> Just my usual one: Please make sure that where you have polygons sharing a >> common border, create an individual way in OSM for this border and use a >> multipolygon relation for each of the neighbouring parcels so that they may >> share the same way and nodes, rather than importing two sets of nodes on top >> of each other (one for parcel A, the other for parcel B). > > > another suggestion. don't make the same mistake as tiger, Massgis, PGS coastline ... imports and tag individual nodes if they are members of a way. don't add too many tags which have no use for osm and can be easily looked up in the source data. also consider to add some less useful tags to the changeset instead. ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Anthony wrote: > I basically just want the address info. > One of these days I want to be able to get door-to-door driving directions which I can *correct* when they're wrong! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Pieren wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Anthony wrote: > Hi Antony, > > Here in France, we also have access to the land registry WMS for the > whole country (only raster images, not the shapefiles excepted for one > "county" who released also the parcels as shapefiles). > We use this source for buildings, street names and addresses but the > data are not always up-to-date. This data is definitely very up-to-date. It is used by the county to impose property taxes, so it has to be up-to-date. They offer new files weekly. But I can only speak for my country. I can understand the temptation > to import everything when you have a bunch of geodata available but > ask yourself if it is really valuable for OSM (I don't have the > answer). > I basically just want the address info. Having the parcel polygons is a bonus, but if it proves to be too difficult to maintain I could just move the data to the ways as an interpolation. Also, remember, keeping all of France (population 61 million) up to date is much harder than keeping Hillsborough County, Florida (population 1 million) up to date :). I don't know, I hope I can run a script regularly to provide a list of changes, and take it from there. But worst case scenario I guess I can just remove everything. Which gives me an idea. I guess I should add a hcparcel:verified=no tag to everything I import. On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Anthony wrote: > >> Any other suggestions? Objections? >> > > Just my usual one: Please make sure that where you have polygons sharing a > common border, create an individual way in OSM for this border and use a > multipolygon relation for each of the neighbouring parcels so that they may > share the same way and nodes, rather than importing two sets of nodes on top > of each other (one for parcel A, the other for parcel B). Thanks. I was planning on matching up the shared nodes (they are duplicated in the source data), but I didn't realize you could create a shared way. I'll figure out how to do that before the import. Good suggestion. This leads me to a question. If I mark the addr:housenumber on the multipolygon relation (that's where it would go, right?), will that show up on the map in the two main renderers? Or should I add a node for this? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Anthony wrote: Hi Antony, Here in France, we also have access to the land registry WMS for the whole country (only raster images, not the shapefiles excepted for one "county" who released also the parcels as shapefiles). We use this source for buildings, street names and addresses but the data are not always up-to-date. We decided to not import parcels because we don't see the interest for the project. It is difficult to maintain (many parcels are modified daily - merged or split at the scale of the country), it is not verifiable (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability) and it does not say anything about the landuse in our case (excepted for the buildings footprints and cemeteries). But I can only speak for my country. I can understand the temptation to import everything when you have a bunch of geodata available but ask yourself if it is really valuable for OSM (I don't have the answer). Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
Hi, Anthony wrote: > I've got parcel data for my county from the property appraiser's > office. It's in shp format, which I have converted to osm format. [...] > Any other suggestions? Objections? Just my usual one: Please make sure that where you have polygons sharing a common border, create an individual way in OSM for this border and use a multipolygon relation for each of the neighbouring parcels so that they may share the same way and nodes, rather than importing two sets of nodes on top of each other (one for parcel A, the other for parcel B). Shapefiles do this but it is a waste of space and actually a loss of information (loss of the info that these are not two borders that happen to coincide but one border). Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090921/55681376/attachment-0001.htm -- Message: 8 Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:44:50 -0400 From: Anthony Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data To: openstreetmap Message-ID: <71cd4dd90909210844l3094567boe245a2b151468...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Anthony wrote: > The data is at ftp://209.26.172.71/. > Username: public Password: access -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090921/2a9902b0/attachment.htm -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk End of talk Digest, Vol 61, Issue 107 * ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel data
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Anthony wrote: > The data is at ftp://209.26.172.71/. > Username: public Password: access ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] parcel data in OSM
Christopher Schmidt writes: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:39:56PM -0800, Sam Vekemans wrote: >> Hi, >> ya, its certainly worth creating a tag proposal page for it. >> I would (imo) would like to see it only rendered when zooming in real close. > > I would disagree that it should be rendered in the main maps at all. > Surveyor data is not interesting to a typical map user, and it is much > better suited for a specialized renderer, not for the general purpose > map browsing that is offered by the main OSM map. That's a fair point, but I've also been thinking about rendering adjusting towards constant details/pixel, putting in more data in less dense places. In Cambridge, MA parcel data would be amazingly cluttered, but out where I am most parcels are > 1 acre and might be interesting esp. at z17. I suppose this really argues for having even easier ways for people to make their own maps from the database, for experimentation and for different needs; I haven't gotten around to setting up pgsql/mapnik/etc. myself. I had already been thinking about trying to enter parcel data for my town. So I think the basic "does it belong" answer is yes. But this raises a few issues: This data will likely be updated by MassGIS and hopefully get better over time. While we want OSMers to be able to edit, it would be really nice to have an automated merge/diff process. It might be useful to design this before doing the big imports since we might want some kind of merge metadata tags. There is the technical issue of database size, with the resulting issues of the size of exports, the size of area downloads for JOSM, etc. Having this data would allow cross-checking of road parcels (or holes) and road centerlines. Not an issue as much as an opportunity for lots of work. pgpoLDxgnVXbo.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] parcel data in OSM
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:39:56PM -0800, Sam Vekemans wrote: > Hi, > ya, its certainly worth creating a tag proposal page for it. > I would (imo) would like to see it only rendered when zooming in real close. I would disagree that it should be rendered in the main maps at all. Surveyor data is not interesting to a typical map user, and it is much better suited for a specialized renderer, not for the general purpose map browsing that is offered by the main OSM map. > Some other renderer might want to see it at a different zoom. > When buying a house, you should know what land your getting :) And you can do that through specizlied applications for house buying (like Zillow). Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 07:00:14PM -0500, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data > for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. This data is > appropriately licensed for re-use in OSM, and is informative -- in most > cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding. > > I'm curious as to whether people believe that this data of this type is > appropriate for upload into OSM. Absolutely, this should go into OSM. OSM has developed to include more and more detail over the last years. Its quite common already to have whole cities with every building outline in it. So land parcels is just one more logical step and nothing to be afraid of. Sure it will be a lot of data and not everybody might need it, but until now we have managed to cope with the influx of data quite well. Part of what I find interesting about OSM is the technical challenge of building a scalable, but still open system. We'll cope with land parcel data, too. We should probably only import part of the data at first to gain some experience with handling it, but eventually we are going for world domination anyway. :-) The French are planning to import their country wide land parcel data also... Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
If imported to OSM, can we edit parcel data? Is it legally allowed for non-surveyors (in the Philippine we call them Geodetic Engineers) to change parcel geometry and attributes? On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: > > On Feb 17, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote: >> >> cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding > > For completely unrelated reasons (I was searching for an unfinished > railroad and was looking to see if it existed in any property lines) > (no, it didn't) (sigh) I had a copy of the parcel data for Oneida > County, New York. It has the address in a fixed field, along with the > name of the road. It would be trivially easy to set addr:housenumber > and addr:street for the parcel. > > The trouble is that I don't know where in that parcel the building is > to be found. And some parcels are quite strangely shaped, e.g. two > squares overlapping only at a corner. And then the street name and > the TIGER street name vary wildly, e.g. tiger:name_base="State Highway > 13" and ocgov:loc_st_nam=Nys Rt 13" (or in another record, "State > Route 13 N"). The latter only matters if the property is on a corner. > > I've noticed that the road is considered to be "unowned", so there's > only one way connecting those nodes. Thus, I'll look for the nodes > with only one way, and tag the center of those nodes with the > address. Might employ some heuristic to guess which road if multiple > roads are found. > > -- > Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson > r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- cheers, maning -- "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] parcel data in OSM
Hi, ya, its certainly worth creating a tag proposal page for it. I would (imo) would like to see it only rendered when zooming in real close. Some other renderer might want to see it at a different zoom. When buying a house, you should know what land your getting :) p.s. I think a variation of that is available on Geobase for Canada :-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Feb 17, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > > cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding For completely unrelated reasons (I was searching for an unfinished railroad and was looking to see if it existed in any property lines) (no, it didn't) (sigh) I had a copy of the parcel data for Oneida County, New York. It has the address in a fixed field, along with the name of the road. It would be trivially easy to set addr:housenumber and addr:street for the parcel. The trouble is that I don't know where in that parcel the building is to be found. And some parcels are quite strangely shaped, e.g. two squares overlapping only at a corner. And then the street name and the TIGER street name vary wildly, e.g. tiger:name_base="State Highway 13" and ocgov:loc_st_nam=Nys Rt 13" (or in another record, "State Route 13 N"). The latter only matters if the property is on a corner. I've noticed that the road is considered to be "unowned", so there's only one way connecting those nodes. Thus, I'll look for the nodes with only one way, and tag the center of those nodes with the address. Might employ some heuristic to guess which road if multiple roads are found. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > Hi, > > Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data > for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. This data is > appropriately licensed for re-use in OSM, and is informative -- in most > cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding. > > I'm curious as to whether people believe that this data of this type is > appropriate for upload into OSM. > > There are clear technical reasons why this data might not belong in OSM > -- the quantity of data is significant, and you can imagine that it > could create a much larger database. At the moment, I'd rather address > the social aspect of whether this data is appropriate to upload to OSM. > > A description of the data in question with regard to MassGIS is > available at: > > http://www.mass.gov/mgis/parcels.htm > > Looking forward to hearing any and all opinions on this matter. I'd say the address data definitely while the parcel data might be too micro at this junction. However, the parcel is closely bound to the address and it may be very difficult to associate an area currently in OSM with the address without the parcels. It seems like it comes down to whether or not the parcels are acceptable. Cheers, Adam ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
Property boundaries are definitely something that belongs in OSM, it's just boundary=administrative at a different level. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt < crschm...@metacarta.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data > for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. > In my quest to find free data to import in the US, I discovered that parcel data is almost universally available for free for almost every local jurisdiction I checked (released for tax purposes). Point is that this could potentially be a *lot* of data. It certainly would be very interesting to see, though! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
