[OSM-talk-be] e-book about OpenStreetMap for free today
Hi, PacktPub gives away a free e-book every day. Today it's a book about OpenStreetMap: https://www.packtpub.com/packt/offers/free-learning Jo ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] GRB open data
On 02-06-16 17:44, Glenn Plas wrote: > Ik heb een tool gemaakt die redelijk af is maar er is zit een wat > diepere problematiek in de data die ik niet in 1 ,2 .. 3 kan uitleggen > op verstaanbare manier. > Nog een randgeval tegen gekomen: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246290812 Als je een landuse (in dit geval school) tagged met een adres heb je nog steeds een merge te doen. Nu dit kunnen we in principe wel opvangen met QA check na een semiautomatische import. PS, Welke behoud ik ? ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] fietsstraat, bicycle_road, cyclestreet,...
On 07-06-16 11:24, Santens Seppe wrote: > Hi all, > > However, the description of bicycle_road in the Wiki [3] is different from de > definition of the cycle streets in Belgium (e.g. bicycle road implies that > cars are not allowed, this is not the case for our cycle streets). The Dutch > wiki suggests cycleway=cyclestreet [4], but cyclestreet=yes is also used. So > I ask you, dear community, what should we do? When there is a consensus, it > might be good to add this to the Belgian Wiki. > I see this problem a bit bigger: I think we should have a general register that defines what a tag implies for each road-law region (usually an entire country). (And this data should ideally not be stored in the Wiki, but rather inside OSM, or a file you can download to use in your routing-software.) For example all our highways are 120, but they are not tagged as such. So it's up to uninformed drivers and router-planners to figure this out. That or we define at-least the default and each mapper get to define the differences from the world-wide norm. (But this will cause newcomers to make many mistakes) (If there is already such a thing, still rather green ;) Regards, Killian ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] fietsstraat, bicycle_road, cyclestreet,...
Tuesday 07 June 2016 12:46:27, Killian De Volder: > On 07-06-16 11:24, Santens Seppe wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > > However, the description of bicycle_road in the Wiki [3] is different from > > de definition of the cycle streets in Belgium (e.g. bicycle road implies > > that cars are not allowed, this is not the case for our cycle streets). The > > Dutch wiki suggests cycleway=cyclestreet [4], but cyclestreet=yes is also > > used. So I ask you, dear community, what should we do? When there is a > > consensus, it might be good to add this to the Belgian Wiki. > > > > I see this problem a bit bigger: > > I think we should have a general register that defines what a tag implies for > each road-law region (usually an entire country). > (And this data should ideally not be stored in the Wiki, but rather inside > OSM, or a file you can download to use in your routing-software.) > For example all our highways are 120, but they are not tagged as such. So > it's up to uninformed drivers and router-planners to figure this out. > > That or we define at-least the default and each mapper get to define the > differences from the world-wide norm. > (But this will cause newcomers to make many mistakes) > > (If there is already such a thing, still rather green ;) I know of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Defaults I didn't find a defaults relation for Belgium. (But I also didn't for France, I got it via the wiki. While searching for France, I found one "France" relation[1], while the defaults "apply" to another one[2].) Maybe there are other efforts as well. [1] http://osm.org/relation/11980 [2] http://osm.org/relation/2202162 -- This message is OpenPGP signed. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] fietsstraat, bicycle_road, cyclestreet,...
On 07-06-16 12:46, Killian De Volder wrote: > I think we should have a general register that defines what a tag implies for > each road-law region (usually an entire country). > (And this data should ideally not be stored in the Wiki, but rather inside > OSM, or a file you can download to use in your routing-software.) > For example all our highways are 120, but they are not tagged as such. So > it's up to uninformed drivers and router-planners to figure this out. That is exactly the intention for plenty of things, If the law changes, we don't need to update thousands of values. It's like tagging foot=no on a moterway... We all know you can't do that. Some stuff only makes sense when you know the implicit rules that apply to the way/object. The law states you can't walk on them. We don't need to tag this explicitly. But most motorways in Belgium have a maxspeed assigned, not sure where this idea comes from. (examples ?) Data consumers will use those rules , and often they are different between nations. Data consumers actually add value to OSM by incorporating these implicit tags in their rule set. They also are free to ignore some of them, and sometimes even have to to make sense. One of the reasons is to prevent troll-tags to take control/messing up logic , see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trolltag > That or we define at-least the default and each mapper get to define the > differences from the world-wide norm. > (But this will cause newcomers to make many mistakes) There are some pages I think you are asking for. Check this one: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed Glenn ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] GRB open data
On 07-06-16 12:32, Killian De Volder wrote: > On 02-06-16 17:44, Glenn Plas wrote: > >> Ik heb een tool gemaakt die redelijk af is maar er is zit een wat >> diepere problematiek in de data die ik niet in 1 ,2 .. 3 kan uitleggen >> op verstaanbare manier. >> > > Nog een randgeval tegen gekomen: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246290812 > > Als je een landuse (in dit geval school) tagged met een adres heb je nog > steeds een merge te doen. Dit is geen landuse maar een amenity dat je ws op doelde. IMHO dit is verkeerd, een addr:* tag hoort op een node, een entrance of een gebouw te staan. Tenzij een amenity ook een gebouw is kan dit wel. Maar adressen horen niet toe tot een streek. (die kan heel groot zijn waardoor addressen minder nauwkeurig wordt). src: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses > Nu dit kunnen we in principe wel opvangen met QA check na een > semiautomatische import. ervoor bedoel je! de manier dat ik de import visualiseer is dat een levende mens dit soort issues ziet en ze oplost. > > PS, Welke behoud ik ? Wat denk je zelf ? Glenn ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] fietsstraat, bicycle_road, cyclestreet,...
On 07-06-16 15:10, Glenn Plas wrote: > explicitly. But most motorways in Belgium have a maxspeed assigned, not > sure where this idea comes from. (examples ?) I made a mistake this is not true > Assuming we indeed wish to implement this proposal (or a modified version of it). Who and when will this be voted on ? (Proposal is from 2010). Looking at the discussion on that page, the main beef seems to be in the details. I also get the feeling we should move this part of the thread of to a more world-wide channel. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] GRB open data
amenity=school + address information is not so unusual 111.000 of them are tagged with some address information according to taginfo. I think the UK community tagged them like this during their quarterly project. (I'm too lazy to look up their discussions to get confirmation about this) The wiki page of school also mentions the combination with the address tag. regards m 2016-06-07 15:36 GMT+02:00 Glenn Plas : > On 07-06-16 12:32, Killian De Volder wrote: >> On 02-06-16 17:44, Glenn Plas wrote: >> >>> Ik heb een tool gemaakt die redelijk af is maar er is zit een wat >>> diepere problematiek in de data die ik niet in 1 ,2 .. 3 kan uitleggen >>> op verstaanbare manier. >>> >> >> Nog een randgeval tegen gekomen: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246290812 >> >> Als je een landuse (in dit geval school) tagged met een adres heb je nog >> steeds een merge te doen. > > Dit is geen landuse maar een amenity dat je ws op doelde. IMHO dit is > verkeerd, een addr:* tag hoort op een node, een entrance of een gebouw > te staan. Tenzij een amenity ook een gebouw is kan dit wel. Maar > adressen horen niet toe tot een streek. (die kan heel groot zijn > waardoor addressen minder nauwkeurig wordt). > > src: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses > >> Nu dit kunnen we in principe wel opvangen met QA check na een >> semiautomatische import. > > ervoor bedoel je! de manier dat ik de import visualiseer is dat een > levende mens dit soort issues ziet en ze oplost. > >> >> PS, Welke behoud ik ? > > Wat denk je zelf ? > > > > Glenn > > > ___ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] fietsstraat, bicycle_road, cyclestreet,...
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Glenn Plas wrote: > But most motorways in Belgium have a maxspeed assigned, not > sure where this idea comes from. (examples ?) I guess you have to dive into the talk page, archive of tagging mailing list, some fora, etc. to find out where the idea came from. [1] has some trails of it. You could also try to contact Dieterdreist (Martin K.) who knows quite a lot about older discussions. m [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:maxspeed ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] GRB open data
I don't think there is a separate landuse=school. Schools generally fall inside a landuse=residential. It's possible to tag building=school. If there is more than 1 building, add an amenity=school for the school grounds. I'd put the addr information on those, except if all the buildings have different addresses. If there is 1 building with 1 school, I guess it can get amenity=school together with building=school. Polyglot Op 7 juni 2016 18:34 schreef Marc Gemis : > amenity=school + address information is not so unusual 111.000 of > them are tagged with some address information according to taginfo. I > think the UK community tagged them like this during their quarterly > project. (I'm too lazy to look up their discussions to get > confirmation about this) > The wiki page of school also mentions the combination with the address tag. > > regards > > > m > > 2016-06-07 15:36 GMT+02:00 Glenn Plas : > > On 07-06-16 12:32, Killian De Volder wrote: > >> On 02-06-16 17:44, Glenn Plas wrote: > >> > >>> Ik heb een tool gemaakt die redelijk af is maar er is zit een wat > >>> diepere problematiek in de data die ik niet in 1 ,2 .. 3 kan uitleggen > >>> op verstaanbare manier. > >>> > >> > >> Nog een randgeval tegen gekomen: > >> > >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246290812 > >> > >> Als je een landuse (in dit geval school) tagged met een adres heb je > nog steeds een merge te doen. > > > > Dit is geen landuse maar een amenity dat je ws op doelde. IMHO dit is > > verkeerd, een addr:* tag hoort op een node, een entrance of een gebouw > > te staan. Tenzij een amenity ook een gebouw is kan dit wel. Maar > > adressen horen niet toe tot een streek. (die kan heel groot zijn > > waardoor addressen minder nauwkeurig wordt). > > > > src: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses > > > >> Nu dit kunnen we in principe wel opvangen met QA check na een > semiautomatische import. > > > > ervoor bedoel je! de manier dat ik de import visualiseer is dat een > > levende mens dit soort issues ziet en ze oplost. > > > >> > >> PS, Welke behoud ik ? > > > > Wat denk je zelf ? > > > > > > > > Glenn > > > > > > ___ > > Talk-be mailing list > > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > ___ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] GRB open data
On 07-06-16 19:04, Jo wrote: > I don't think there is a separate landuse=school. Schools generally fall > inside a landuse=residential. > > It's possible to tag building=school. If there is more than 1 building, > add an amenity=school for the school grounds. I'd put the addr > information on those, except if all the buildings have different addresses. > > If there is 1 building with 1 school, I guess it can get amenity=school > together with building=school. > Duplicate housenumbers on seperate buildings is -for certain- an error, if there are plenty of buildings in a school, then you could create a relation and addr:* it once instead of all buildings, or map the school grounds as per Jo's suggestion. Also a good idea is to create an amenity relation of buildings and address that one. It's also not uncommon that an amenity=school contains different addresses on the same building and even different addresses on different buildings all belonging to the same school. It's not easy to sort this out ... An alternative idea would be to just map the entrances and address those instead of the buildings. It's still 'wrong' if there is a physical tag missing logic dictates .e.g building ... In any case.. it's -sometimes- terrible for routing and geocoding purposes due to the possible size of an amenity giving distorted results. So far the theory... I tested it with geocoding and it seems to be supported though. I find exact matches when looking for onjects that only have address information present on amenities, so I can confirm nominatim looks at them. That being said, just discovered I actually mapped this myself in the past to 'solve' multiple buildings sporting the same address data, but also to support some of the buildings having a different address yet they still belong to the same school. The way I formed my opinion is by trying to find anything on addr:* combined with an amenity on the wiki and I remarkably didn't find anything to confirm nor deny that idea. I remember mapping this school: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/205862112#map=19/50.96950/4.44678 Sure enough, just an amenity. In the light of about 111K addressed amenities in the UK as Marc mentions I would think this is de facto accepted but not well documented. So, I'm adjusting my opinion on this now and consider it OK instead of wrong. Glenn ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] GRB open data
FYI, some people will also map amenity=pub, restaurant, etc. as the area for e.g. the pub + terrace + parking space and put the address on that area (was also discussed on the GB--mailing list in order to seek a common way of mapping amenities.) Others might map this as landuse=retail. Furthermore there have been discussions in the past to have some kind of landuse dedicated for schools, again with the purpose to have more similarity with e.g. building=house,landuse=residential. So, you can see there are all kinds of ideas and methods to tag. regards m On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Glenn Plas wrote: > On 07-06-16 19:04, Jo wrote: >> I don't think there is a separate landuse=school. Schools generally fall >> inside a landuse=residential. >> >> It's possible to tag building=school. If there is more than 1 building, >> add an amenity=school for the school grounds. I'd put the addr >> information on those, except if all the buildings have different addresses. >> >> If there is 1 building with 1 school, I guess it can get amenity=school >> together with building=school. >> > > Duplicate housenumbers on seperate buildings is -for certain- an error, > if there are plenty of buildings in a school, then you could create a > relation and addr:* it once instead of all buildings, or map the school > grounds as per Jo's suggestion. Also a good idea is to create an amenity > relation of buildings and address that one. > > It's also not uncommon that an amenity=school contains different > addresses on the same building and even different addresses on different > buildings all belonging to the same school. It's not easy to sort this > out ... An alternative idea would be to just map the entrances and > address those instead of the buildings. > > It's still 'wrong' if there is a physical tag missing logic dictates > .e.g building ... In any case.. it's -sometimes- terrible for routing > and geocoding purposes due to the possible size of an amenity giving > distorted results. So far the theory... > > I tested it with geocoding and it seems to be supported though. I find > exact matches when looking for onjects that only have address > information present on amenities, so I can confirm nominatim looks at them. > > That being said, just discovered I actually mapped this myself in the > past to 'solve' multiple buildings sporting the same address data, but > also to support some of the buildings having a different address yet > they still belong to the same school. > > The way I formed my opinion is by trying to find anything on addr:* > combined with an amenity on the wiki and I remarkably didn't find > anything to confirm nor deny that idea. > > I remember mapping this school: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/205862112#map=19/50.96950/4.44678 > > Sure enough, just an amenity. In the light of about 111K addressed > amenities in the UK as Marc mentions I would think this is de facto > accepted but not well documented. > > So, I'm adjusting my opinion on this now and consider it OK instead of > wrong. > > Glenn > > > > ___ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
