Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi All
We will be releasing a new Data.SA website by 1 June which will enable some
feedback to be provided to dataset owners. Users of Data.SA will also be able
to comment on a dataset, request a dataset and submit case studies where open
data has been used to solve a problem or provide a service. This will help
citizens engage with those who release the data.
Cheers
Open Data Team
From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 13 March 2015 5:26 PM
To: simon.coste...@ga.gov.au
Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Henry Haselgrove; ODG:Data SA
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au.
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi Simon,
We are communicating back corrections via the LGAs; which in turn is fed to
DPTI and presumably onto datasets like GNAF eventually.
We are still feeling out the best way to track issues or questions. I
personally like github as a slightly more effective way than person to person
email; as it radiates information well.
Unfortunately it's not to friendly to binary files/shapefiles; so it is best
used for feedback rather than as a publication spot (perhaps there are things
that can be done with CKAN to get the best of both worlds).
I think we as a community would be very interested in any suggestions to make
feedback more relevant/effective/streamlined. At SA's unleashed (govhack) last
year, a number of us got talking to the folks behind
data.sa.gov.auhttp://data.sa.gov.au and this kind of problem - how can we
show what value is being created with open data, how can we turn it into a two
way conversation, etc.
On 13/03/2015 5:04 PM,
simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.au wrote:
Hi there,
Does any of this feedback go back to the custodians in South Australia?
I am looking at improving some of the feedback loops.
Thanks,
Simon
Simon Costello
Group Leader, National Location Information | EGD Management
Environmental Geoscience Division | GEOSCIENCE AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 2 6249 9716tel:%2B61%202%206249%209716tel:+61%202%206249%209716
Fax: +61 2 6249 tel:%2B61%202%206249%20tel:+61%202%206249%20
Email:
simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.au
Web: www.ga.gov.auhttp://www.ga.gov.auhttp://www.ga.gov.au/
Cnr Jerrabomberra Avenue and Hindmarsh Drive Symonston ACT
GPO Box 378 Canberra ACT 2601 Australiax-apple-data-detectors://3
Applying geoscience to Australia’s most important challenges
On 10 Mar 2015, at 11:01 am, Henry Haselgrove
haselgr...@gmail.commailto:haselgr...@gmail.commailto:haselgr...@gmail.commailto:haselgr...@gmail.com
wrote:
I agree… with a dataset this large prioritisation is important. All your
specific suggestions for culling parts from missing.osm sound good. It would be
easy to add an option to the scripts to exclude highway={primary, secondary,
track}. And the suggestions you made via github look good too.
However, I think that some more significant changes to the script should be
done before this data is unleased onto maproulette. The roads that are
currently in missing.osm fall (more or less) under three categories:
-- roads that are completely absent in OSM
-- roads that appear in OSM, but have an empty name
-- roads that appear in OSM and have a non-empty name which is
different to the datasa name, either because OSM is wrong or datasa is wrong
(or because both are right, such as “Mount Magnificent Road” versus “Mt.
Magnificent Road”)
I propose to modify the script to automatically exclude as much as possible
from the third category. Because, it will be hard for an armchair mapper to
decide whether OSM or datasa is wrong in those cases. I could try to do this
over the coming week.
I’m not sure I agree that the Adelaide metro area should be given particular
priority over other areas. But I’m probably biased, since I grew up in rural SA!
Probably we should make a posting to the osm “imports” list before too much
longer, to let them know what we’re thinking.
From: Daniel O'Connor
[mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.commailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 9 March 2015 5:32 AM
To: Henry Haselgrove
Cc: Alex Sims; OSM Australian Talk List
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from
data.sa.gov.auhttp://data.sa.gov.auhttp://data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well.
There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the dataset
is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these?
I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way.
The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours work
barely makes a dent.
I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from the
data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and it's
still very sizable.
I'd
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Nice!
On 11/05/2015 6:01 PM, ODG:Data SA dat...@sa.gov.au wrote:
Hi All
We will be releasing a new Data.SA website by 1 June which will enable
some feedback to be provided to dataset owners. Users of Data.SA will also
be able to comment on a dataset, request a dataset and submit case studies
where open data has been used to solve a problem or provide a service.
This will help citizens engage with those who release the data.
Cheers
Open Data Team
*From:* Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Friday, 13 March 2015 5:26 PM
*To:* simon.coste...@ga.gov.au
*Cc:* talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Henry Haselgrove; ODG:Data SA
*Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au.
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi Simon,
We are communicating back corrections via the LGAs; which in turn is fed
to DPTI and presumably onto datasets like GNAF eventually.
We are still feeling out the best way to track issues or questions. I
personally like github as a slightly more effective way than person to
person email; as it radiates information well.
Unfortunately it's not to friendly to binary files/shapefiles; so it is
best used for feedback rather than as a publication spot (perhaps there are
things that can be done with CKAN to get the best of both worlds).
I think we as a community would be very interested in any suggestions to
make feedback more relevant/effective/streamlined. At SA's unleashed
(govhack) last year, a number of us got talking to the folks behind
data.sa.gov.au and this kind of problem - how can we show what value is
being created with open data, how can we turn it into a two way
conversation, etc.
On 13/03/2015 5:04 PM, simon.coste...@ga.gov.au wrote:
Hi there,
Does any of this feedback go back to the custodians in South Australia?
I am looking at improving some of the feedback loops.
Thanks,
Simon
Simon Costello
Group Leader, National Location Information | EGD Management
Environmental Geoscience Division | GEOSCIENCE AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 2 6249 9716tel:+61%202%206249%209716 +61%202%206249%209716
Fax: +61 2 6249 tel:+61%202%206249%20 +61%202%206249%20
Email: simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.au
Web: www.ga.gov.auhttp://www.ga.gov.au/
Cnr Jerrabomberra Avenue and Hindmarsh Drive Symonston ACT
GPO Box 378 Canberra ACT 2601 Australiax-apple-data-detectors://3
Applying geoscience to Australia’s most important challenges
On 10 Mar 2015, at 11:01 am, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com
mailto:haselgr...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree… with a dataset this large prioritisation is important. All your
specific suggestions for culling parts from missing.osm sound good. It
would be easy to add an option to the scripts to exclude highway={primary,
secondary, track}. And the suggestions you made via github look good too.
However, I think that some more significant changes to the script should
be done before this data is unleased onto maproulette. The roads that are
currently in missing.osm fall (more or less) under three categories:
-- roads that are completely absent in OSM
-- roads that appear in OSM, but have an empty name
-- roads that appear in OSM and have a non-empty name
which is different to the datasa name, either because OSM is wrong or
datasa is wrong (or because both are right, such as “Mount Magnificent
Road” versus “Mt. Magnificent Road”)
I propose to modify the script to automatically exclude as much as
possible from the third category. Because, it will be hard for an armchair
mapper to decide whether OSM or datasa is wrong in those cases. I could try
to do this over the coming week.
I’m not sure I agree that the Adelaide metro area should be given
particular priority over other areas. But I’m probably biased, since I grew
up in rural SA!
Probably we should make a posting to the osm “imports” list before too
much longer, to let them know what we’re thinking.
From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 9 March 2015 5:32 AM
To: Henry Haselgrove
Cc: Alex Sims; OSM Australian Talk List
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
http://data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well.
There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the
dataset is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these?
I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way.
The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours
work barely makes a dent.
I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from
the data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and
it's still very sizable.
I'd be really keen on maproulette at this point - you seem to be able to
produce updated files fairly regularly, adding a few bash
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
For those of your that are interested, we've made a fair number of improvements to the process and edited quite a large number of ways. You can see the improvement via http://qa.poole.ch/ - compared to other states/places, South Australia is showing a very low density of errors. New Zealand, Northern Territory and Tasmania seem comparable or slightly better. There are approximately 5000 unnamed roads remaining, and 4000 naming differences to check after that. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi there,
Does any of this feedback go back to the custodians in South Australia?
I am looking at improving some of the feedback loops.
Thanks,
Simon
Simon Costello
Group Leader, National Location Information | EGD Management
Environmental Geoscience Division | GEOSCIENCE AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 2 6249 9716tel:+61%202%206249%209716Fax: +61 2 6249
tel:+61%202%206249%20
Email: simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.auWeb:
www.ga.gov.auhttp://www.ga.gov.au/
Cnr Jerrabomberra Avenue and Hindmarsh Drive Symonston ACT
GPO Box 378 Canberra ACT 2601 Australiax-apple-data-detectors://3
Applying geoscience to Australia’s most important challenges
On 10 Mar 2015, at 11:01 am, Henry Haselgrove
haselgr...@gmail.commailto:haselgr...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree… with a dataset this large prioritisation is important. All your
specific suggestions for culling parts from missing.osm sound good. It would be
easy to add an option to the scripts to exclude highway={primary, secondary,
track}. And the suggestions you made via github look good too.
However, I think that some more significant changes to the script should be
done before this data is unleased onto maproulette. The roads that are
currently in missing.osm fall (more or less) under three categories:
-- roads that are completely absent in OSM
-- roads that appear in OSM, but have an empty name
-- roads that appear in OSM and have a non-empty name which is
different to the datasa name, either because OSM is wrong or datasa is wrong
(or because both are right, such as “Mount Magnificent Road” versus “Mt.
Magnificent Road”)
I propose to modify the script to automatically exclude as much as possible
from the third category. Because, it will be hard for an armchair mapper to
decide whether OSM or datasa is wrong in those cases. I could try to do this
over the coming week.
I’m not sure I agree that the Adelaide metro area should be given particular
priority over other areas. But I’m probably biased, since I grew up in rural SA!
Probably we should make a posting to the osm “imports” list before too much
longer, to let them know what we’re thinking.
From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 9 March 2015 5:32 AM
To: Henry Haselgrove
Cc: Alex Sims; OSM Australian Talk List
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from
data.sa.gov.auhttp://data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well.
There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the dataset
is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these?
I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way.
The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours work
barely makes a dent.
I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from the
data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and it's
still very sizable.
I'd be really keen on maproulette at this point - you seem to be able to
produce updated files fairly regularly, adding a few bash scripts to turn that
into curl friendly statements seems achievable.
Going to start sending a few pull requests your way to get us started on this.
Geoscience Australia Disclaimer: This e-mail (and files transmitted with it) is
intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient, then you have received this e-mail by mistake and any
use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail and its file
attachments is prohibited. The security of emails transmitted cannot be
guaranteed; by forwarding or replying to this email, you acknowledge and accept
these risks.
-
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi Simon,
We are communicating back corrections via the LGAs; which in turn is fed to
DPTI and presumably onto datasets like GNAF eventually.
We are still feeling out the best way to track issues or questions. I
personally like github as a slightly more effective way than person to
person email; as it radiates information well.
Unfortunately it's not to friendly to binary files/shapefiles; so it is
best used for feedback rather than as a publication spot (perhaps there are
things that can be done with CKAN to get the best of both worlds).
I think we as a community would be very interested in any suggestions to
make feedback more relevant/effective/streamlined. At SA's unleashed
(govhack) last year, a number of us got talking to the folks behind
data.sa.gov.au and this kind of problem - how can we show what value is
being created with open data, how can we turn it into a two way
conversation, etc.
On 13/03/2015 5:04 PM, simon.coste...@ga.gov.au wrote:
Hi there,
Does any of this feedback go back to the custodians in South Australia?
I am looking at improving some of the feedback loops.
Thanks,
Simon
Simon Costello
Group Leader, National Location Information | EGD Management
Environmental Geoscience Division | GEOSCIENCE AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 2 6249 9716tel:+61%202%206249%209716Fax: +61 2 6249
tel:+61%202%206249%20
Email: simon.coste...@ga.gov.aumailto:simon.coste...@ga.gov.au
Web: www.ga.gov.auhttp://www.ga.gov.au/
Cnr Jerrabomberra Avenue and Hindmarsh Drive Symonston ACT
GPO Box 378 Canberra ACT 2601 Australiax-apple-data-detectors://3
Applying geoscience to Australia’s most important challenges
On 10 Mar 2015, at 11:01 am, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com
mailto:haselgr...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree… with a dataset this large prioritisation is important. All your
specific suggestions for culling parts from missing.osm sound good. It
would be easy to add an option to the scripts to exclude highway={primary,
secondary, track}. And the suggestions you made via github look good too.
However, I think that some more significant changes to the script should
be done before this data is unleased onto maproulette. The roads that are
currently in missing.osm fall (more or less) under three categories:
-- roads that are completely absent in OSM
-- roads that appear in OSM, but have an empty name
-- roads that appear in OSM and have a non-empty name
which is different to the datasa name, either because OSM is wrong or
datasa is wrong (or because both are right, such as “Mount Magnificent
Road” versus “Mt. Magnificent Road”)
I propose to modify the script to automatically exclude as much as
possible from the third category. Because, it will be hard for an armchair
mapper to decide whether OSM or datasa is wrong in those cases. I could try
to do this over the coming week.
I’m not sure I agree that the Adelaide metro area should be given
particular priority over other areas. But I’m probably biased, since I grew
up in rural SA!
Probably we should make a posting to the osm “imports” list before too
much longer, to let them know what we’re thinking.
From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 9 March 2015 5:32 AM
To: Henry Haselgrove
Cc: Alex Sims; OSM Australian Talk List
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
http://data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well.
There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the
dataset is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these?
I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way.
The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours
work barely makes a dent.
I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from
the data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and
it's still very sizable.
I'd be really keen on maproulette at this point - you seem to be able to
produce updated files fairly regularly, adding a few bash scripts to turn
that into curl friendly statements seems achievable.
Going to start sending a few pull requests your way to get us started on
this.
Geoscience Australia Disclaimer: This e-mail (and files transmitted with
it) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If
you are not the intended recipient, then you have received this e-mail by
mistake and any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this
e-mail and its file attachments is prohibited. The security of emails
transmitted cannot be guaranteed; by forwarding or replying to this email,
you acknowledge and accept these risks
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
I agree… with a dataset this large prioritisation is important. All your
specific suggestions for culling parts from missing.osm sound good. It would be
easy to add an option to the scripts to exclude highway={primary, secondary,
track}. And the suggestions you made via github look good too.
However, I think that some more significant changes to the script should be
done before this data is unleased onto maproulette. The roads that are
currently in missing.osm fall (more or less) under three categories:
-- roads that are completely absent in OSM
-- roads that appear in OSM, but have an empty name
-- roads that appear in OSM and have a non-empty name which is
different to the datasa name, either because OSM is wrong or datasa is wrong
(or because both are right, such as “Mount Magnificent Road” versus “Mt.
Magnificent Road”)
I propose to modify the script to automatically exclude as much as possible
from the third category. Because, it will be hard for an armchair mapper to
decide whether OSM or datasa is wrong in those cases. I could try to do this
over the coming week.
I’m not sure I agree that the Adelaide metro area should be given particular
priority over other areas. But I’m probably biased, since I grew up in rural SA!
Probably we should make a posting to the osm “imports” list before too much
longer, to let them know what we’re thinking.
From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 9 March 2015 5:32 AM
To: Henry Haselgrove
Cc: Alex Sims; OSM Australian Talk List
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well.
There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the dataset
is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these?
I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way.
The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours work
barely makes a dent.
I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from the
data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and it's
still very sizable.
I'd be really keen on maproulette at this point - you seem to be able to
produce updated files fairly regularly, adding a few bash scripts to turn that
into curl friendly statements seems achievable.
Going to start sending a few pull requests your way to get us started on this.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
https://github.com/CloCkWeRX/osm-scripts/tree/add_maproulette is what I
started last night.
Biggest missing part is a persistent identifier, because I manipulated the
samples via JOSM first (thus nuking a repeatable task id); and it's not
100% clear around if I should be creating One Big Task GeoJSON or a lot of
little ones.
I doubt my ruby script is going to scale well to the whole dataset either;
so if you wanted to produce .geojson in the format of
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CloCkWeRX/osm-scripts/add_maproulette/maproulette/task.json
then the rest is pretty easy!
See http://dev.maproulette.org/api/challenges?return_inactive=1 for the
project stub.
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com
wrote:
I agree… with a dataset this large prioritisation is important. All your
specific suggestions for culling parts from missing.osm sound good. It
would be easy to add an option to the scripts to exclude highway={primary,
secondary, track}. And the suggestions you made via github look good too.
However, I think that some more significant changes to the script should
be done before this data is unleased onto maproulette. The roads that are
currently in missing.osm fall (more or less) under three categories:
-- roads that are completely absent in OSM
-- roads that appear in OSM, but have an empty name
-- roads that appear in OSM and have a non-empty name
which is different to the datasa name, either because OSM is wrong or
datasa is wrong (or because both are right, such as “Mount Magnificent
Road” versus “Mt. Magnificent Road”)
I propose to modify the script to automatically exclude as much as
possible from the third category. Because, it will be hard for an armchair
mapper to decide whether OSM or datasa is wrong in those cases. I could try
to do this over the coming week.
I’m not sure I agree that the Adelaide metro area should be given
particular priority over other areas. But I’m probably biased, since I grew
up in rural SA!
Probably we should make a posting to the osm “imports” list before too
much longer, to let them know what we’re thinking.
*From:* Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, 9 March 2015 5:32 AM
*To:* Henry Haselgrove
*Cc:* Alex Sims; OSM Australian Talk List
*Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well.
There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the
dataset is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these?
I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way.
The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours
work barely makes a dent.
I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from
the data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and
it's still very sizable.
I'd be *really* keen on maproulette at this point - you seem to be able
to produce updated files fairly regularly, adding a few bash scripts to
turn that into curl friendly statements seems achievable.
Going to start sending a few pull requests your way to get us started on
this.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
So, after doing this manually for a bit; it's generally working well. There are some where spot checking against other sources suggests the dataset is wrong, how do you suggest we indicate these? I've put in NOTE or FIXME on the relevant way. The thing that is troubling me is the size of the dataset - a few hours work barely makes a dent. I've taken to deleting all Primary/Trunk, Secondary and Track ways from the data set; and then cropping stuff down to the metro adelaide area; and it's still very sizable. I'd be *really* keen on maproulette at this point - you seem to be able to produce updated files fairly regularly, adding a few bash scripts to turn that into curl friendly statements seems achievable. Going to start sending a few pull requests your way to get us started on this. On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com wrote: Well spotted, Alex. It is interesting that both of the errors you have found have been in the “type” part of the name (e.g., street/lane/terrace etc). There seems to be approximately 1000 roads where the difference between the OSM and datasa versions is the type (excluding cases that could easily be determined to be typos in OSM, like terace, cresent, etc). I wonder what proportion of those 1000 are errors in datasa? I have decided to modify my scripts so that they omit from “missing.osm” cases where the difference is only in the road-type portion of the name. The script will now put these cases into a different file, “different_road_type.osm”, instead. Except, the cases of obviously misspelled OSM road types will stay in missing.osm. I have placed my latest versions of missing.osm and different_road_type.osm in the Google Drive folder. I have also pushed the new versions of the scripts to Github. Incidentally, the scripts now put the tag “upload=false” into the .osm files, so that if you accidentally hit “Upload” in JOSM when you are on that layer bad things won’t happen! Cheers, Henry *From:* Alex Sims [mailto:a...@softgrow.com] *Sent:* Thursday, 26 February 2015 1:35 AM *To:* OSM Australian Talk List *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au I’ve started finding errors not on OpenStreetMap but in the DPTI data. I’ve documented a fix process at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/South_Australian_Roads#Errors_in_the_source_data It’s not as easy as an edit on the Map but it should work Alex ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
Well spotted, Alex. It is interesting that both of the errors you have found have been in the “type” part of the name (e.g., street/lane/terrace etc). There seems to be approximately 1000 roads where the difference between the OSM and datasa versions is the type (excluding cases that could easily be determined to be typos in OSM, like terace, cresent, etc). I wonder what proportion of those 1000 are errors in datasa? I have decided to modify my scripts so that they omit from “missing.osm” cases where the difference is only in the road-type portion of the name. The script will now put these cases into a different file, “different_road_type.osm”, instead. Except, the cases of obviously misspelled OSM road types will stay in missing.osm. I have placed my latest versions of missing.osm and different_road_type.osm in the Google Drive folder. I have also pushed the new versions of the scripts to Github. Incidentally, the scripts now put the tag “upload=false” into the .osm files, so that if you accidentally hit “Upload” in JOSM when you are on that layer bad things won’t happen! Cheers, Henry From: Alex Sims [mailto:a...@softgrow.com] Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2015 1:35 AM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au I’ve started finding errors not on OpenStreetMap but in the DPTI data. I’ve documented a fix process at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/South_Australian_Roads#Errors_in_the_source_data It’s not as easy as an edit on the Map but it should work Alex ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
I’ve started finding errors not on OpenStreetMap but in the DPTI data. I’ve documented a fix process at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/South_Australian_Roads#Errors_in_the_source_data https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/South_Australian_Roads#Errors_in_the_source_data It’s not as easy as an edit on the Map but it should work Alex To make a project is just using curl plus json to describe it and add tasks. Uh can't find github link right now but the api is pretty clear. Happy to help set that up later today/this week, as well as get the process automated (git, 1x cron, etc) On 22/02/2015 11:20 AM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com mailto:haselgr...@gmail.com wrote: From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Softgrow has done some work in metro Adelaide around checking roads: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia Thanks. I had seen the edits Softgrow has done, but I wasn’t aware it was documented anywhere ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
I have put the Matlab scripts here: https://github.com/q-bits/osm-scripts From: Alex Sims [mailto:a...@softgrow.com] Sent: Sunday, 22 February 2015 8:16 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au Hi, Can you please make the matlab scripts available on Github so they might be used/improved? I’m particularly wanting to use the output, then check the revised output, rinse, lather, repeat Alex ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
Hi, Can you please make the matlab scripts available on Github so they might be used/improved? I’m particularly wanting to use the output, then check the revised output, rinse, lather, repeat Alex To make a project is just using curl plus json to describe it and add tasks. Uh can't find github link right now but the api is pretty clear. Happy to help set that up later today/this week, as well as get the process automated (git, 1x cron, etc) On 22/02/2015 11:20 AM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com mailto:haselgr...@gmail.com wrote: From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Softgrow has done some work in metro Adelaide around checking roads: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia Thanks. I had seen the edits Softgrow has done, but I wasn’t aware it was documented anywhere ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Softgrow has done some work in metro Adelaide around checking roads: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia Thanks. I had seen the edits Softgrow has done, but I wasn’t aware it was documented anywhere From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 21 February 2015 3:39 AM Couple of false positives: Knox Terrace (Metro area, near waterfall gully) - it's a bit windy and for some reason not matched Actually this is not a false positive. The OSM version of the name has too many R’s !! Some of the walking trails near mt lofty OBahn busway probably should be excluded. There's a lot of little laneways, etc that are worthwhile adding in on their own. Given that importing this is probably not a great idea, what other ways could you present the data - as a list with clickable links to the coordatines/OSM way? Or even better, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapRoulette/Challenges ? I will try to give this some thought. I just had a brief look at MapRoulette, but I don’t really understand yet what the technical requirements are. Just loading the .osm file as a separate layer in JOSM seems to be a reasonable way to use the data. Potentially, I could re-generate the file often, to provide an up-to-date indication of what is left to do. However there would be no easy way for someone to mark for others the fact that a way doesn’t really need changing; and that could lead to some duplicated effort. Incidentally, I noticed that you used some of the data in the last 24hrs to update road names on KI. I decided to have a go too, adding some missing roads, also to KI. The procedure of copying a road from one layer to another, joining it to existing ways, and uploading, seems to be fairly easy once you get into the rhythm. I was able to add around one missing road every 30 seconds or so. By the way, I have just put an updated version of “missing.osm” in my Google Drive folder, based on the state of OSM today (rather than 9 Feb, like the previous one). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
Neat. So map roulette would solve the 'no need to fix On 22/02/2015 11:20 AM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com wrote: * From:* Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Softgrow has done some work in metro Adelaide around checking roads: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia Thanks. I had seen the edits Softgrow has done, but I wasn’t aware it was documented anywhere * From:* Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] * Sent:* Saturday, 21 February 2015 3:39 AM Couple of false positives: Knox Terrace (Metro area, near waterfall gully) - it's a bit windy and for some reason not matched Actually this is not a false positive. The OSM version of the name has too many R’s !! Some of the walking trails near mt lofty OBahn busway probably should be excluded. There's a lot of little laneways, etc that are worthwhile adding in on their own. Given that importing this is probably not a great idea, what other ways could you present the data - as a list with clickable links to the coordatines/OSM way? Or even better, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapRoulette/Challenges ? I will try to give this some thought. I just had a brief look at MapRoulette, but I don’t really understand yet what the technical requirements are. Just loading the .osm file as a separate layer in JOSM seems to be a reasonable way to use the data. Potentially, I could re-generate the file often, to provide an up-to-date indication of what is left to do. However there would be no easy way for someone to mark for others the fact that a way doesn’t really need changing; and that could lead to some duplicated effort. Incidentally, I noticed that you used some of the data in the last 24hrs to update road names on KI. I decided to have a go too, adding some missing roads, also to KI. The procedure of copying a road from one layer to another, joining it to existing ways, and uploading, seems to be fairly easy once you get into the rhythm. I was able to add around one missing road every 30 seconds or so. By the way, I have just put an updated version of “missing.osm” in my Google Drive folder, based on the state of OSM today (rather than 9 Feb, like the previous one). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
Neat. So map roulette would solve the 'no need to fix' signal to others. To make a project is just using curl plus json to describe it and add tasks. Uh can't find github link right now but the api is pretty clear. Happy to help set that up later today/this week, as well as get the process automated (git, 1x cron, etc) On 22/02/2015 11:20 AM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com wrote: From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Softgrow has done some work in metro Adelaide around checking roads: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia Thanks. I had seen the edits Softgrow has done, but I wasn’t aware it was documented anywhere From: Daniel O'Connor [mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 21 February 2015 3:39 AM Couple of false positives: Knox Terrace (Metro area, near waterfall gully) - it's a bit windy and for some reason not matched Actually this is not a false positive. The OSM version of the name has too many R’s !! Some of the walking trails near mt lofty OBahn busway probably should be excluded. There's a lot of little laneways, etc that are worthwhile adding in on their own. Given that importing this is probably not a great idea, what other ways could you present the data - as a list with clickable links to the coordatines/OSM way? Or even better, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapRoulette/Challenges ? I will try to give this some thought. I just had a brief look at MapRoulette, but I don’t really understand yet what the technical requirements are. Just loading the .osm file as a separate layer in JOSM seems to be a reasonable way to use the data. Potentially, I could re-generate the file often, to provide an up-to-date indication of what is left to do. However there would be no easy way for someone to mark for others the fact that a way doesn’t really need changing; and that could lead to some duplicated effort. Incidentally, I noticed that you used some of the data in the last 24hrs to update road names on KI. I decided to have a go too, adding some missing roads, also to KI. The procedure of copying a road from one layer to another, joining it to existing ways, and uploading, seems to be fairly easy once you get into the rhythm. I was able to add around one missing road every 30 seconds or so. By the way, I have just put an updated version of “missing.osm” in my Google Drive folder, based on the state of OSM today (rather than 9 Feb, like the previous one). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Using roads dataset from data.sa.gov.au
Softgrow has done some work in metro Adelaide around checking roads: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_South_Australia I would be keen for: - New roads (housing developments etc) in metro, outer metro areas first - Identifying naming conflicts in metro areas next The later I would recommend manual checking of (happy to help) to avoid clobbering roads that simply need splitting using a process like the one on the sa project page. On 21/02/2015 12:20 PM, Henry Haselgrove haselgr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I have recently been looking at the “roads” dataset on data.sa.gov.au, and trying to figure out if there is a good way to use it in OSM. One thing I have tried so far is to process the data in a manner that identifies roads that are missing or incorrectly tagged in OSM. The result is a .osm file that contains approximately 20,000 ways from data.sa.gov.au that are either missing or named differently to what is in OSM. The data covers not only SA but also the western 100km of VIC. I don’t think that automatically merging this data into OSM would be a good idea, unless anyone knows of a clever way to do that. However I reckon the file could be a valuable source for manual edits. I put a brief description of my work on the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/South_Australian_Roads I would be interested in other ideas you might have for how to use the source dataset. I should mention that, in the .osm file I have distilled so far, I tried to include only public roads, by excluding any way that does not have a name. About half of the source dataset consists of unnamed ways, which seem to be a combination of private access roads and driveways, and rural tracks. Perhaps some of this data could be useful in OSM too. Cheers, Henry ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
