Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
I think in the US the tiger import used such tags with the aim to remove them once the item has been checked. A massive and still ongoing effort from what I heard. On 20 July 2020 10:17:25 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey wrote: >On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 12:33, David Wales >wrote: > >> Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key? >> >> e.g. some_import_object_id=123456 >> >> Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM >with >> the key in the source data. > > >It can be a deterrent to mappers, they may see these external ids and >think >oh I don't understand that, maybe it's special and I shouldn't touch >it, >maybe it is owner by someone else and they update it directly. > >Similar to what Mateusz said, if the community can't verify it, how do >we >know it's right? What should we do if things change on the ground? How >do >we know if the ID still applies to the new tag? In my opinion a better >solution for a private linkage is for the 3rd party database to point >directly to the OSM node/way/relation ID. The external database should >monitor for changes to those IDs and then review after each change if >the >linkage is correct or needs changing. > >Though still the private ID method has been used for imports of the >past, >and I'm not saying it can't be used, but there are disadvantages and >valid >concerns. > >On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 14:08, Greg Dutkowski >wrote: > >> Hi, >> I was thinking of using the ref tag to store the council ID for the >> object, and then the council could use the OSMID in their database. >> What I was looking for was tools or approaches for keeping the two in >> sync. The foreign keys in each system are part of that. >> The conflation tools Andew Harvey pointed to may be a way to go. >> OSM is so big and diverse it is hard to get your head around all of >the >> possibilities, so contacts with people who are making conflation work >would >> be ideal. >> > >I haven't tried those tools before, but my outsider view is that they >are >too low level and not mature. I would love to see something similar to >Maproulette or Tasking Manager from an ease of use and non-technical >setup >point of view but for maintaining linkages with external datasets. > >I wrote recently about a conflation I did to compare government traffic >lights data https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/diary/393663 and >I >avoided any coding in that process. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Hi, Have you discovered https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap_for_Government ? It collects projects where governments seek closer integration with OSM. One in particular comes to mind: "An Open Summer of Code (osoc) project to building a tool to compare and maintain OSM cycle routes with the official ones" When it comes to the ever-present "but what if someone changes MY data!" worry, I usually say: - if data had a tendency to deteriorate once in OSM, how come our data is getting ever better? - it's totally possible to write software to monitor the evolution of "your" data in OSM all the time - you could validate "your" data in OSM at set time X, then keep a copy of that around as your "authoritative copy". At time X+1 compare your copy to the now evolved OSM data. Fix in OSM if needed, make a new extract. Best, Joost On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 5:32 AM Greg Dutkowski wrote: > Thanks, I'll check it out. > Greg Dutkowski > +61 0362238495/0408238495 > 1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART. > > > On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 12:48, Andrew Harvey > wrote: > >> Richard Fairhurst posted something very relavent to this topic at this >> https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1285590975511957504 in particular >> http://theodi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-05-Providing-data-to-OpenStreetMap.pdf >> >> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling >>> infrastructure information in OSM. >>> Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have >>> done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not >>> always correct. >>> Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but they >>> usually have little interaction with OSM. >>> It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in tandem >>> with OSM data so that they kept each other up to date, each storing the >>> info that is most useful for them. For instance, for bike parking, there is >>> little utility in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info that the >>> councils use to maintain their assets (although the ref tag could be used >>> as a foreign key to help keep the two in sych). >>> The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the >>> data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. >>> Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government >>> itself working to keep OSM data up to date? >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Greg Dutkowski >>> +61 0362238495/0408238495 >>> 1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART. >>> ___ >>> 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 > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Thanks, I'll check it out. Greg Dutkowski +61 0362238495/0408238495 1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART. On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 12:48, Andrew Harvey wrote: > Richard Fairhurst posted something very relavent to this topic at this > https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1285590975511957504 in particular > http://theodi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-05-Providing-data-to-OpenStreetMap.pdf > > On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski > wrote: > >> Hi, >> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling >> infrastructure information in OSM. >> Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have >> done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not >> always correct. >> Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but they >> usually have little interaction with OSM. >> It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in tandem with >> OSM data so that they kept each other up to date, each storing the info >> that is most useful for them. For instance, for bike parking, there is >> little utility in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info that the >> councils use to maintain their assets (although the ref tag could be used >> as a foreign key to help keep the two in sych). >> The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the >> data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. >> Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government >> itself working to keep OSM data up to date? >> Thanks. >> >> Greg Dutkowski >> +61 0362238495/0408238495 >> 1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART. >> ___ >> 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] Working with local government
Richard Fairhurst posted something very relavent to this topic at this https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1285590975511957504 in particular http://theodi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-05-Providing-data-to-OpenStreetMap.pdf On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski wrote: > Hi, > Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling > infrastructure information in OSM. > Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have > done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not > always correct. > Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but they > usually have little interaction with OSM. > It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in tandem with > OSM data so that they kept each other up to date, each storing the info > that is most useful for them. For instance, for bike parking, there is > little utility in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info that the > councils use to maintain their assets (although the ref tag could be used > as a foreign key to help keep the two in sych). > The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the > data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. > Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government > itself working to keep OSM data up to date? > Thanks. > > Greg Dutkowski > +61 0362238495/0408238495 > 1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART. > ___ > 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] Working with local government
I think that it is a good summary (disclaimer - I am doing it an extremely tiny scale, with extremely small dataset of points). Exact implementation details depends on what you exactly need - detect deletion in OSM? detect missing data in OSM dataset/foreign dataset? Detect differences that will appear? Produce dataset containing both OSM data and data from foreign dataset (may be necessary if for some reason that data is not importable into OSM and it is OK to produce ODBL dataset). Jul 21, 2020, 06:02 by ahhug...@gmail.com: > Hi All, > > We expect to encounter the same problem at the NHVR if we begin to use OSM. > > My (possibly unfounded) initial thoughts are based around linking the OSM & > Source feature outside OSM in something similar to a "join" table. The join > might be on attribution (id), geometry or both. Then, you have to accept that > the link/join will break and a process is needed to detect breakages when > they happen so they can be repaired (a mix of automated & manual). > > Someone else might be able to comment on this with more clarity. > > The way I see it, you can't stop the breakage. You have to accept it and deal > with change. > > A Hughes > > > On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 23:10, Sebastian Spiess <> mapp...@consebt.de> > wrote: > >> On 9/7/20 7:52 pm, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by >>> greg.dutkow...@gmail.com>>> : >>> Hi, Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve thequality of cycling infrastructure information in OSM. Much has been done by volunteers in variousjurisdictions, and we have done lots locally, but thetagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not alwayscorrect. Local councils are responsible for much of theinfrastructure, but they usually have little interactionwith OSM. It would be most efficient if the councils GIS dataworked in tandem with OSM data so that they kept each otherup to date, each storing the info that is most useful forthem. For instance, for bike parking, there is littleutility in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info thatthe councils use to maintain their assets (although the reftag could be used as a foreign key to help keep the two insych). The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with thequality of the data in OSM and the ability of anyone tochange it. Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from oflocal government itself working to keep OSM data up to date? Thanks. >>> One of the easiest things that local government may do is to >>> >>> 1) publish their datasets on an open license allowing to useit by >>> mappers >>> 2) react to reports of mistakes in their data >>> >>> Both work relatively well in Poland for address data - with >>> publishing required by >>> national law (though still ignored be many local governments) >>> >>> Note that (1) is useful for mappers even if data quality is >>> unsufficient to import it >>> into OSM. I am using a bit noisy bicycle parking in locating >>> unmapped ones >>> (often location, description and real location mismatches >>> significantly, but >>> almost always it allows me to find something that was missingin OSM) >>> >>> ___Talk-au mailing list>>> >>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >> >> Hi, indeed great to see you reach out. >> >> >> Yes I agree that a good approach is to make the data open. However, I >> understand Greg is asking if there are working concepts on how to >> maintain a link between local government GIS (which might have >> additional information) and OSM data. >> >> >> Once the relevant information has been entered into OSM, how is the >> council to track the data? e.g. to see if tags get modified, nodes >> moved, added. >> >> >> e.g. worst case is that a nicely mapped and tagged area gets re-done by >> someone. This results in new node and way numbers. >> >> >> A good example would be a single node gets expanded by OSM users. >> >> >> In both cases the data is diverging from another. How to keep track? >> Are there concepts/solutions? >> >> >> Yes >> >> ___ >> 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] Working with local government
That's exactly how I see it working too. Eventually we could probably put together a document of best practice, suggestions for the workflow as a guide for anyone else looking to set this up. On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 14:04, Andrew Hughes wrote: > Hi All, > > We expect to encounter the same problem at the NHVR if we begin to use OSM. > > My (possibly unfounded) initial thoughts are based around linking the OSM > & Source feature outside OSM in something similar to a "join" table. The > join might be on attribution (id), geometry or both. Then, you have to > accept that the link/join will break and a process is needed to detect > breakages when they happen so they can be repaired (a mix of automated & > manual). > > Someone else might be able to comment on this with more clarity. > > The way I see it, you can't stop the breakage. You have to accept it and > deal with change. > > A Hughes > > > On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 23:10, Sebastian Spiess wrote: > >> On 9/7/20 7:52 pm, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by greg.dutkow...@gmail.com: >> >> Hi, >> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling >> infrastructure information in OSM. >> Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have >> done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not >> always correct. >> Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but they >> usually have little interaction with OSM. >> It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in tandem with >> OSM data so that they kept each other up to date, each storing the info >> that is most useful for them. For instance, for bike parking, there is >> little utility in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info that the >> councils use to maintain their assets (although the ref tag could be used >> as a foreign key to help keep the two in sych). >> The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the >> data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. >> Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government >> itself working to keep OSM data up to date? >> Thanks. >> >> One of the easiest things that local government may do is to >> >> 1) publish their datasets on an open license allowing to use it by mappers >> 2) react to reports of mistakes in their data >> >> Both work relatively well in Poland for address data - with publishing >> required by >> national law (though still ignored be many local governments) >> >> Note that (1) is useful for mappers even if data quality is unsufficient >> to import it >> into OSM. I am using a bit noisy bicycle parking in locating unmapped ones >> (often location, description and real location mismatches significantly, >> but >> almost always it allows me to find something that was missing in OSM) >> >> ___ >> Talk-au mailing >> listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> >> Hi, indeed great to see you reach out. >> >> Yes I agree that a good approach is to make the data open. However, I >> understand Greg is asking if there are working concepts on how to maintain >> a link between local government GIS (which might have additional >> information) and OSM data. >> >> Once the relevant information has been entered into OSM, how is the >> council to track the data? e.g. to see if tags get modified, nodes moved, >> added. >> >> e.g. worst case is that a nicely mapped and tagged area gets re-done by >> someone. This results in new node and way numbers. >> >> A good example would be a single node gets expanded by OSM users. >> >> In both cases the data is diverging from another. How to keep track? Are >> there concepts/solutions? >> >> Yes >> ___ >> 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 > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Hi All, We expect to encounter the same problem at the NHVR if we begin to use OSM. My (possibly unfounded) initial thoughts are based around linking the OSM & Source feature outside OSM in something similar to a "join" table. The join might be on attribution (id), geometry or both. Then, you have to accept that the link/join will break and a process is needed to detect breakages when they happen so they can be repaired (a mix of automated & manual). Someone else might be able to comment on this with more clarity. The way I see it, you can't stop the breakage. You have to accept it and deal with change. A Hughes On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 23:10, Sebastian Spiess wrote: > On 9/7/20 7:52 pm, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote: > > > > > Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by greg.dutkow...@gmail.com: > > Hi, > Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling > infrastructure information in OSM. > Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have > done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not > always correct. > Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but they > usually have little interaction with OSM. > It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in tandem with > OSM data so that they kept each other up to date, each storing the info > that is most useful for them. For instance, for bike parking, there is > little utility in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info that the > councils use to maintain their assets (although the ref tag could be used > as a foreign key to help keep the two in sych). > The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the > data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. > Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government > itself working to keep OSM data up to date? > Thanks. > > One of the easiest things that local government may do is to > > 1) publish their datasets on an open license allowing to use it by mappers > 2) react to reports of mistakes in their data > > Both work relatively well in Poland for address data - with publishing > required by > national law (though still ignored be many local governments) > > Note that (1) is useful for mappers even if data quality is unsufficient > to import it > into OSM. I am using a bit noisy bicycle parking in locating unmapped ones > (often location, description and real location mismatches significantly, > but > almost always it allows me to find something that was missing in OSM) > > ___ > Talk-au mailing > listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > Hi, indeed great to see you reach out. > > Yes I agree that a good approach is to make the data open. However, I > understand Greg is asking if there are working concepts on how to maintain > a link between local government GIS (which might have additional > information) and OSM data. > > Once the relevant information has been entered into OSM, how is the > council to track the data? e.g. to see if tags get modified, nodes moved, > added. > > e.g. worst case is that a nicely mapped and tagged area gets re-done by > someone. This results in new node and way numbers. > > A good example would be a single node gets expanded by OSM users. > > In both cases the data is diverging from another. How to keep track? Are > there concepts/solutions? > > Yes > ___ > 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] Working with local government
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 12:33, David Wales wrote: > Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key? > > e.g. some_import_object_id=123456 > > Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM with > the key in the source data. It can be a deterrent to mappers, they may see these external ids and think oh I don't understand that, maybe it's special and I shouldn't touch it, maybe it is owner by someone else and they update it directly. Similar to what Mateusz said, if the community can't verify it, how do we know it's right? What should we do if things change on the ground? How do we know if the ID still applies to the new tag? In my opinion a better solution for a private linkage is for the 3rd party database to point directly to the OSM node/way/relation ID. The external database should monitor for changes to those IDs and then review after each change if the linkage is correct or needs changing. Though still the private ID method has been used for imports of the past, and I'm not saying it can't be used, but there are disadvantages and valid concerns. On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 14:08, Greg Dutkowski wrote: > Hi, > I was thinking of using the ref tag to store the council ID for the > object, and then the council could use the OSMID in their database. > What I was looking for was tools or approaches for keeping the two in > sync. The foreign keys in each system are part of that. > The conflation tools Andew Harvey pointed to may be a way to go. > OSM is so big and diverse it is hard to get your head around all of the > possibilities, so contacts with people who are making conflation work would > be ideal. > I haven't tried those tools before, but my outsider view is that they are too low level and not mature. I would love to see something similar to Maproulette or Tasking Manager from an ease of use and non-technical setup point of view but for maintaining linkages with external datasets. I wrote recently about a conflation I did to compare government traffic lights data https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/diary/393663 and I avoided any coding in that process. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
I imagine this approach would work better on nodes than on ways. But I imagine that the number of keys with changed nodes would be much fewer than the total number of keys, allowing the unchanged nodes to be easily updated, and reducing the conflation burden. On 20/7/20 5:24 pm, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote: > (1) pollution of tags by such keys is irritating > (2) people may split, move, delete, edit or copy such tag > > wikidata key is slightly better - but requires wikidata entries > > Jul 20, 2020, 04:33 by daviewa...@disroot.org: > > Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key? > > e.g. some_import_object_id=123456 > > Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in > OSM with the key in the source data. > > On 19 July 2020 11:21:04 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey > wrote: > > > > On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg Dutkowski > mailto:greg.dutkow...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > Hi, > Thanks for everyone's input. > Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do. > It seems inefficient for local government to make their > data open and then hope the OSM community translates it to > OSM tagging. > > Better for local government to put their data directly > into OSM and maintain a two way link to their data. > > > While that is certainly welcome, I would never have an > expectation of it. I expectat that all public funded works are > made open without restrictions on use (of course subject to > privacy concerns or other special considerations) so at least > the OSM community can use it if we like, anything above and > beyond this is a welcome contribution. > > If a local government is thinking about this, I'd just say > engage with us so we can all work together. > > > Examples and tools from anyone who is trying to keep > external data in sync with OSM will be most useful. > > > There are some conflation tools > at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Conflation but > they appear to all need a lot of coding to get up and running. > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
(1) pollution of tags by such keys is irritating (2) people may split, move, delete, edit or copy such tag wikidata key is slightly better - but requires wikidata entries Jul 20, 2020, 04:33 by daviewa...@disroot.org: > Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key? > > e.g. some_import_object_id=123456 > > Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM with the > key in the source data. > > On 19 July 2020 11:21:04 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg Dutkowski <>> greg.dutkow...@gmail.com>> >> > wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Thanks for everyone's input. >>> Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do. >>> It seems inefficient for local government to make their data open and then >>> hope the OSM community translates it to OSM tagging. >>> >>> Better for local government to put their data directly into OSM and >>> maintain a two way link to their data. >>> >> >> While that is certainly welcome, I would never have an expectation of it. I >> expectat that all public funded works are made open without restrictions on >> use (of course subject to privacy concerns or other special considerations) >> so at least the OSM community can use it if we like, anything above and >> beyond this is a welcome contribution. >> >> If a local government is thinking about this, I'd just say engage with us so >> we can all work together. >> >> >>> Examples and tools from anyone who is trying to keep external data in sync >>> with OSM will be most useful. >>> >> >> There are some conflation tools at >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Conflation>> but they appear >> to all need a lot of coding to get up and running. >> ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Hi, I was thinking of using the ref tag to store the council ID for the object, and then the council could use the OSMID in their database. What I was looking for was tools or approaches for keeping the two in sync. The foreign keys in each system are part of that. The conflation tools Andew Harvey pointed to may be a way to go. OSM is so big and diverse it is hard to get your head around all of the possibilities, so contacts with people who are making conflation work would be ideal. Greg Dutkowski +61 0362238495/0408238495 1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART. On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 12:33, David Wales wrote: > Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key? > > e.g. some_import_object_id=123456 > > Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM with > the key in the source data. > > On 19 July 2020 11:21:04 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg Dutkowski >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Thanks for everyone's input. >>> Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do. >>> It seems inefficient for local government to make their data open and >>> then hope the OSM community translates it to OSM tagging. >>> >> Better for local government to put their data directly into OSM and >>> maintain a two way link to their data. >>> >> >> While that is certainly welcome, I would never have an expectation of it. >> I expectat that all public funded works are made open without restrictions >> on use (of course subject to privacy concerns or other special >> considerations) so at least the OSM community can use it if we like, >> anything above and beyond this is a welcome contribution. >> >> If a local government is thinking about this, I'd just say engage with us >> so we can all work together. >> >> >>> Examples and tools from anyone who is trying to keep external data in >>> sync with OSM will be most useful. >>> >> >> There are some conflation tools at >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Conflation but they appear >> to all need a lot of coding to get up and running. >> > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key? e.g. some_import_object_id=123456 Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM with the key in the source data. On 19 July 2020 11:21:04 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey wrote: >On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg Dutkowski >wrote: > >> Hi, >> Thanks for everyone's input. >> Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do. >> It seems inefficient for local government to make their data open and >then >> hope the OSM community translates it to OSM tagging. >> >Better for local government to put their data directly into OSM and >> maintain a two way link to their data. >> > >While that is certainly welcome, I would never have an expectation of >it. I >expectat that all public funded works are made open without >restrictions on >use (of course subject to privacy concerns or other special >considerations) >so at least the OSM community can use it if we like, anything above and >beyond this is a welcome contribution. > >If a local government is thinking about this, I'd just say engage with >us >so we can all work together. > > >> Examples and tools from anyone who is trying to keep external data in >> sync with OSM will be most useful. >> > >There are some conflation tools at >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Conflation but they appear >to >all need a lot of coding to get up and running. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg Dutkowski wrote: > Hi, > Thanks for everyone's input. > Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do. > It seems inefficient for local government to make their data open and then > hope the OSM community translates it to OSM tagging. > Better for local government to put their data directly into OSM and > maintain a two way link to their data. > While that is certainly welcome, I would never have an expectation of it. I expectat that all public funded works are made open without restrictions on use (of course subject to privacy concerns or other special considerations) so at least the OSM community can use it if we like, anything above and beyond this is a welcome contribution. If a local government is thinking about this, I'd just say engage with us so we can all work together. > Examples and tools from anyone who is trying to keep external data in > sync with OSM will be most useful. > There are some conflation tools at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Conflation but they appear to all need a lot of coding to get up and running. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
On 9/7/20 7:52 pm, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote: > > > > Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by greg.dutkow...@gmail.com: > > Hi, > Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of > cycling infrastructure information in OSM. > Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we > have done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle > paths and not always correct. > Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but > they usually have little interaction with OSM. > It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in > tandem with OSM data so that they kept each other up to date, each > storing the info that is most useful for them. For instance, for > bike parking, there is little utility in OSM storing the asset > numbers and other info that the councils use to maintain their > assets (although the ref tag could be used as a foreign key to > help keep the two in sych). > The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of > the data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. > Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local > government itself working to keep OSM data up to date? > Thanks. > > One of the easiest things that local government may do is to > > 1) publish their datasets on an open license allowing to use it by mappers > 2) react to reports of mistakes in their data > > Both work relatively well in Poland for address data - with publishing > required by > national law (though still ignored be many local governments) > > Note that (1) is useful for mappers even if data quality is > unsufficient to import it > into OSM. I am using a bit noisy bicycle parking in locating unmapped ones > (often location, description and real location mismatches > significantly, but > almost always it allows me to find something that was missing in OSM) > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au Hi, indeed great to see you reach out. Yes I agree that a good approach is to make the data open. However, I understand Greg is asking if there are working concepts on how to maintain a link between local government GIS (which might have additional information) and OSM data. Once the relevant information has been entered into OSM, how is the council to track the data? e.g. to see if tags get modified, nodes moved, added. e.g. worst case is that a nicely mapped and tagged area gets re-done by someone. This results in new node and way numbers. A good example would be a single node gets expanded by OSM users. In both cases the data is diverging from another. How to keep track? Are there concepts/solutions? Yes ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by greg.dutkow...@gmail.com: > Hi, > Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling > infrastructure information in OSM. > Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have done > lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not always > correct. > Local councils are responsible for much of the infrastructure, but they > usually have little interaction with OSM. > It would be most efficient if the councils GIS data worked in tandem with OSM > data so that they kept each other up to date, each storing the info that is > most useful for them. For instance, for bike parking, there is little utility > in OSM storing the asset numbers and other info that the councils use to > maintain their assets (although the ref tag could be used as a foreign key to > help keep the two in sych). > The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the data > in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. > Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government > itself working to keep OSM data up to date? > Thanks. > One of the easiest things that local government may do is to 1) publish their datasets on an open license allowing to use it by mappers 2) react to reports of mistakes in their data Both work relatively well in Poland for address data - with publishing required by national law (though still ignored be many local governments) Note that (1) is useful for mappers even if data quality is unsufficient to import it into OSM. I am using a bit noisy bicycle parking in locating unmapped ones (often location, description and real location mismatches significantly, but almost always it allows me to find something that was missing in OSM) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Working with local government
Take a look at... https://opencouncildata.org/ perhaps. There is a mailing list (quiet at the moment); a set of standards for a bunch of open data ( http://standards.opencouncildata.org/); etc. There isn't a specific one for cycling infrastructure; but its a good model they can perhaps follow; and the community imports what is relevant/useful. There are a lot of victorian councils they could get some advice from on a lot of these issues, which may help. On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 2:54 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski > wrote: > >> Hi, >> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling >> infrastructure information in OSM. >> Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have >> done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not >> always correct. >> > > Hi and nice to see you're getting involved with mapping cycle > infrastructure in Tassie. > > >> The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the >> data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. >> > > I would try to reframe that. The fact that anyone can update OSM means > that the dataset can be more accurate and current. Same with quality of the > data, because you have a whole range of contributors and downstream data > users there's more eyes looking at it and using it and so more opportunity > to spot issues. > > City of Sydney and Transport for NSW have been rolling out popup covid > cycleways and there's multiple OSM community members + TfNSW staff going in > mapping these throughout their construction lifecycle. > > Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government >> itself working to keep OSM data up to date? >> > > I'm not sure of local government but Transport for NSW > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TfNSW make edits in OSM. > > ___ > 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] Working with local government
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski wrote: > Hi, > Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling > infrastructure information in OSM. > Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have > done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not > always correct. > Hi and nice to see you're getting involved with mapping cycle infrastructure in Tassie. > The Hobart councils we work with are concerned with the quality of the > data in OSM and the ability of anyone to change it. > I would try to reframe that. The fact that anyone can update OSM means that the dataset can be more accurate and current. Same with quality of the data, because you have a whole range of contributors and downstream data users there's more eyes looking at it and using it and so more opportunity to spot issues. City of Sydney and Transport for NSW have been rolling out popup covid cycleways and there's multiple OSM community members + TfNSW staff going in mapping these throughout their construction lifecycle. Does anyone know of any examples we could learn from of local government > itself working to keep OSM data up to date? > I'm not sure of local government but Transport for NSW https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TfNSW make edits in OSM. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
