Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
Why country codes? OSM is geospatially aware. On 09/04/2020 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 14:26, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 09:21, Tony OSM wrote: If the data is to be in the public domain the next step has to be tagging. Do we need country specific tags for these two pieces of data? What should they be? [snip] So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think? Oops. If we were to use the ISO Alpha-2 country codes, it should of course be GB rather then UK. So that would make the keys ref:GB:uprn and ref:GB:usrn . Robert. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
On 10/04/2020 17:37, Brian Prangle wrote: Can I ask two basic daft questions? What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing the lot ( which is highly unlikely)? UPRNs will be useful on any mapped building or area, as it will help link OSM data to other datasets in a consistent way. Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence compatible? That depends on what's in the dataset that eventually gets released as open data. I would expect that the canonical name of the street would be part of the data, though. If so, then yes, we can use it. One of the reasons why the government has been persuaded to release UPRNs and USRNs as open data is because there is a big push to get third party data users (eg, utility companies, roadworks contractor and planning applicants) to use the same identifiers as government (local and national) already does internally, so as to minimise the risk of errors in conversion from one identifier to another. To some extent that's already happening, because the big guys are already paying for AddressBase and have a licence to use the data. But it's recognised that for it to become ubiquitous, the data has to be open as many potential users can't, or won't, pay for a commercial licence. To give an example, a lot of planning applications for greenfield developments and agricultural buildings are on land that doesn't have an assigned postal address (because nobody sends post to a field or a barn!). So they get described on planning applications as something like "Land adjacent to 53 Greendale Lane" or "Barn in field behind 23 Pencaster Road", which often isn't helpful as that can be ambiguous. The applicant has to provide what's called the "red line" plan showing the outline of the property to which the application refers, but these are not necessarily accurate. But if a UPRN is provided, the planning authority can look that up on the Land Registry database and see precisely where it is, and the extent of the property, without needing to rely on the applicant's information. And, again, while large scale professional developers almost always get it right (because they can afford to spend money on professional data and mapping), it's the small guys who often don't. So if they can be steered towards supplying the UPRN of the location, it will make things easier all round. But that relies on the UPRN being available and reusable in the first place. Mark ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
On 10/04/2020 17:37, Brian Prangle wrote: Can I ask two basic daft questions? Perfectly reasonable questions ... What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing the lot ( which is highly unlikely)? I'll repeat that we do need to wait and see exactly what will be released, and how comprehensive the data is, but in theory it should be quite possible to cross check a vast range of 'objects' in the database, and more important pick up additions and subtractions of those objects automatically. The comparison is probably with the French property database which I understand has been imported, but I would still prefer to be able to merge third party sources like this with the existing outline in OSM rather than simply importing everything into OSM ... Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence compatible? Exactly the same answer as above, but we know exactly what objects are being handled, and if populated, the exact status of a 'way' can be confirmed. The accuracy is only that of the data sources, but there is a legal requirement for councils to provide updates in timely manor. My feed was 3 monthly, but I think faster updates are now happening at least as new road names are created. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
Can I ask two basic daft questions? What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing the lot ( which is highly unlikely)? Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence compatible? Regards Brian On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 13:14, Mark Goodge wrote: > > > On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote: > > If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn? > > It doesn't denote an address. While a lot of premises that have a UPRN > also have an address, there are also many that don't. Every individual > field in an agricultural area has a UPRN, for example, as do things like > telephone boxes and street lamps. In fact, one of the main reasons > behind the adoption of UPRNs as the unique identifier for properties is > that addresses alone can't fulfil that purpose. > > Mark > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote: If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn? It doesn't denote an address. While a lot of premises that have a UPRN also have an address, there are also many that don't. Every individual field in an agricultural area has a UPRN, for example, as do things like telephone boxes and street lamps. In fact, one of the main reasons behind the adoption of UPRNs as the unique identifier for properties is that addresses alone can't fulfil that purpose. Mark ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
Prefer capitalised ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn as wikipage for ref https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref shows towards the end that US and FR are used to build up refs, FR has a page showing all their ref's https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/France/Liste_des_r%C3%A9f%C3%A9rences_nationales Possibly of interest ISO 3166 allows for GB to be sudivided by local government area to produce eg council areaGB-ABE Aberdeen City en council areaGB-ABD Aberdeenshire en council areaGB-ANS Angus en districtGB-ANN Antrim and Newtownabbey en Not to be part of addr: but as standalone keys. I recognise coding could obviate the need for GB - but that's hard work , GB is easy and memorable and matches what other OSM'rs are doing, and extensible if other countries have keys with the same acronym. Tony Shield On 09/04/2020 20:28, Dan S wrote: Op do 9 apr. 2020 om 19:47 schreef Lester Caine : On 09/04/2020 15:32, Mark Goodge wrote: So I'd propose that we use either ref:uprn and ref:usrn, or ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn. What does everyone else think? I'd be happy with either, so long as it's consistent. That is ideal from my point of view ... yes you can get the country by processing the location information, but being able to simply list all of them WITHOUT the overhead of other processing has to be the right way forward? We could make such an argument about any tag, e.g. "addr:postcode" couldn't we? Someone who wants a GB-only list can easily get them from a GB extract such as Geofabrik's. On the other hand I'm happy with "ref:gb:uprn" and "ref:gb:usrn" if preferred (can we use lowercase for convenience please?) since it seems these terms are not global. Best Dan ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
On 10/04/2020 08:04, Jez Nicholson wrote: I don't think they meant 'replace an address with addr:uprn', just enhance it. I was not being as clear as I should have been. A UPRN parcel of land or object includes those for which an address is not appropriate and which 'Royal Mail' would never deliver to so I don't think it is appropriate to merge with the addr: set. I've already indicated that we need to wait and see just what quality of data will be provided, but I ecpevt that some council areas will not actually have postcode in the data. Certainly 15 years ago when I started receiving datasets this was a secondary piece of data yet at that time we were looking to manage the postcode tables for the councils that were providing the UPRN feed! They were not prepared to pay Royal Mail for data that they were legally required to create themselves ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites
Sorry to come late to this party. It would also be useful to indicate morgues & their capacity, if people have access to that information. Eg, most mosques have one. Schedule 28 Coronavirus Act gives powers to local authorities to demand this information. Would be good if it were there in half-decent form on OSM before needed. On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 17:27, Andy Mabbett wrote: > On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L wrote: > > > The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP > > Surgeries and health sites. > > Good to know; thank you. > > Do we have, or plan, any social media promotion of this activity? I'd > be happy to amplify it, and my contacts at Wikimedia UK will do so, > too. > > -- > Andy Mabbett > @pigsonthewing > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence
I don't think they meant 'replace an address with addr:uprn', just enhance it. On Thu, 9 Apr 2020, 21:37 Lester Caine, wrote: > On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote: > > If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn? > There is no intention that UPRN will replace an address. It will be able > to return a unique address but there will be no move to remove that > duplicate data from OSM. What the UPRN allows is the addition of > external information which is also managed by public services. > > -- > Lester Caine - G8HFL > - > Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact > L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk > Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk > Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
