Re: [talk-au] Transponders mistagged
On 22 April 2011 18:35, Gary Gallagher wrote: >I've been rereading the wiki entry. Is it proposing a structure in > which each transponder is first created as a node labeled > "man_made=communications_transponder" each with all their details. Than > they are grouped as a relation with the > "type=communication_tower_group". Presumably the group could also have > height for the mast and other information? The ACMA data listed the height for the antenna on the mast, the relation links to the mast node as well as storing information about the individual antenna in a relation. If we were to store each antenna as a node it would most likely get merged, as many of other nodes have been merged by others in the past. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Transponders mistagged
On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 13:43 +1000, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:31:22 +1000 > Gary Gallagher wrote: > > > Hi, > >I've been editing some areas of rural Victoria and I keep coming > > across communications transponders that have been mis-tagged as > > relations. in the .osm file the xml looks like this:- > > > >> timestamp='2010-05-22T23:46:04Z' uid='74617' user='JohnSmith' > > visible='true' version='2' changeset='4779256'> > > > > > > > > > v='http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_9150' /> > > > v='directional' /> > v='744.25' /> > v='PAL' /> > v='horizontal' /> > v='1000' /> > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure about some of the tags but from what I can figure out > > from the transponder proposal at > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Communications_Transponder > > the should be > v='communications_transponder' /> and the whole thing should be a > > node and not a relation. I could perhaps write an xsl script to clean > > up the individual .osm files I use but this mis-tag is all over the > > state, and perhaps Australia. Is there someone who knows how to do a > > more systemic clean up. > > > > cheers > >Gary > > The logical reason for a relation is that there are numerous parts to > the transponders at various heights and that there are several per > aerial mast / comms hut > Perhaps the wiki page needs a rewrite? > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au Hi, I've been rereading the wiki entry. Is it proposing a structure in which each transponder is first created as a node labeled "man_made=communications_transponder" each with all their details. Than they are grouped as a relation with the "type=communication_tower_group". Presumably the group could also have height for the mast and other information? regards Gary ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Transponders mistagged
On 22 April 2011 13:43, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > The logical reason for a relation is that there are numerous parts to > the transponders at various heights and that there are several per > aerial mast / comms hut > Perhaps the wiki page needs a rewrite? I thought the wiki page was added to about the time that data was added, but Elizabeth is correct about multiple transponders per location. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Transponders mistagged
On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:31:22 +1000 Gary Gallagher wrote: > Hi, >I've been editing some areas of rural Victoria and I keep coming > across communications transponders that have been mis-tagged as > relations. in the .osm file the xml looks like this:- > >timestamp='2010-05-22T23:46:04Z' uid='74617' user='JohnSmith' > visible='true' version='2' changeset='4779256'> > > > > v='http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_9150' /> > v='directional' /> v='744.25' /> v='PAL' /> v='horizontal' /> v='1000' /> > > > > > I'm not sure about some of the tags but from what I can figure out > from the transponder proposal at > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Communications_Transponder > the should be v='communications_transponder' /> and the whole thing should be a > node and not a relation. I could perhaps write an xsl script to clean > up the individual .osm files I use but this mis-tag is all over the > state, and perhaps Australia. Is there someone who knows how to do a > more systemic clean up. > > cheers >Gary The logical reason for a relation is that there are numerous parts to the transponders at various heights and that there are several per aerial mast / comms hut Perhaps the wiki page needs a rewrite? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Transponders mistagged
Hi, I've been editing some areas of rural Victoria and I keep coming across communications transponders that have been mis-tagged as relations. in the .osm file the xml looks like this:- I'm not sure about some of the tags but from what I can figure out from the transponder proposal at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Communications_Transponder the should be and the whole thing should be a node and not a relation. I could perhaps write an xsl script to clean up the individual .osm files I use but this mis-tag is all over the state, and perhaps Australia. Is there someone who knows how to do a more systemic clean up. cheers Gary ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
