Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
Dear Lester, > start_date and end_date exist, But are not used as much SHOULD be. > http://www.slideshare.net/frankieroberto/mapp-history-on-open-street-map was > presented last year and gives a nice summary ... I was sure somebody would have done this before!. I'll ask Mr Roberto if he pursued this any further. > The problem with providing the data in a separate database is how to sync the > two ... when does something marked as 'demolished' get moved to the 'historic' > version. Either there should be a proper mechanism for providing 'overlays', > or the data simply gets stored in the exidting database. In many cases ALL > this is missing is a start_date for existing objects on the ground. While > some objects my eventually be obliterated by future development, on the whole > the road system in London for example has simply evolved and expanded so all > that is needed is to know when a road first appeared? No clutter as such, > just currently missing real data? Agreed, hopefully the archives holding a lot of this data/maps would be interested in integrating it into an historical OSM. regards, Richard -- Richard Palmer | Centre for E-Research & Systems Manager | Centre for Computing in the Humanities richard.d.pal...@kcl.ac.uk | King's College London Tel: 0207 848 1973 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
Richard Palmer wrote: On 26/09/2010 23:47, Richard Palmer wrote: > > I'm involved in a project looking at the history of a street in London > > (The Strand). One of things we'd like to do is produce a 'animated' map > > showing the changes along it from the C18th onwards. I've had a go at > > adding some attributes to OSM for building dates and then generated > > different tiles for layers each century, (quick demo up at: > > Is this what we should be using OSM for? For me OSM is for*current* > data (I've been deleting any demolished buildings). Sorry, I should have made clear, for this project we're quite happy to run a seperate mapnik/openlayers server showing the data. Although I would be quite interested in building that up into a more general historical map server (ideally kept in sync with "current" OSM but historical information as well), but that's just a personal project (with lots of problems!) and not what's needed at the moment. > This project sounds great, but should be set up as a separate entity. > The database would become far to cluttered otherwise. Agreed. > I've an abandoned railway in my area where sections of it are now > invisible having been completely leveled& used as agricultural land. > Someone's tagged these as railway=abandoned. I don't think they should. Yes, what's more interesting (and now possible) for me would be showing the change in usage over time, especially for heavily mapped areas like London. start_date and end_date exist, But are not used as much SHOULD be. http://www.slideshare.net/frankieroberto/mapp-history-on-open-street-map was presented last year and gives a nice summary ... The problem with providing the data in a separate database is how to sync the two ... when does something marked as 'demolished' get moved to the 'historic' version. Either there should be a proper mechanism for providing 'overlays', or the data simply gets stored in the exidting database. In many cases ALL this is missing is a start_date for existing objects on the ground. While some objects my eventually be obliterated by future development, on the whole the road system in London for example has simply evolved and expanded so all that is needed is to know when a road first appeared? No clutter as such, just currently missing real data? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
On 27/09/2010 12:02, Dave F. wrote: I've an abandoned railway in my area where sections of it are now invisible having been completely leveled & used as agricultural land. Someone's tagged these as railway=abandoned. I don't think they should. I'd agree with that. I think that what happened was that (some years ago) large swathes of former railways were traced from NPE or similar. Whilst it may be useful to see how old railways are incorporated into other features, this one certainly don't sound like "abandoned" to me (I'd tend to use railway=dismantled if there's nothing visible on the ground). I think that the "railway=abandoned when they aren't there any more" problem may be more of a GB issue than elsewhere due to historical NPE tracing. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
Dear Dave, > On 26/09/2010 23:47, Richard Palmer wrote: > > I'm involved in a project looking at the history of a street in London > > (The Strand). One of things we'd like to do is produce a 'animated' map > > showing the changes along it from the C18th onwards. I've had a go at > > adding some attributes to OSM for building dates and then generated > > different tiles for layers each century, (quick demo up at: > > Is this what we should be using OSM for? For me OSM is for *current* > data (I've been deleting any demolished buildings). Sorry, I should have made clear, for this project we're quite happy to run a seperate mapnik/openlayers server showing the data. Although I would be quite interested in building that up into a more general historical map server (ideally kept in sync with "current" OSM but historical information as well), but that's just a personal project (with lots of problems!) and not what's needed at the moment. > This project sounds great, but should be set up as a separate entity. > The database would become far to cluttered otherwise. Agreed. > I've an abandoned railway in my area where sections of it are now > invisible having been completely leveled & used as agricultural land. > Someone's tagged these as railway=abandoned. I don't think they should. Yes, what's more interesting (and now possible) for me would be showing the change in usage over time, especially for heavily mapped areas like London. regards, Richard -- Richard Palmer | Centre for E-Research & Systems Manager | Centre for Computing in the Humanities richard.d.pal...@kcl.ac.uk | King's College London Tel: 0207 848 1973 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
Dave F. wrote on 27/09/2010 12:02: On 26/09/2010 23:47, Richard Palmer wrote: Dear all, I'm involved in a project looking at the history of a street in London (The Strand). One of things we'd like to do is produce a 'animated' map showing the changes along it from the C18th onwards. I've had a go at adding some attributes to OSM for building dates and then generated different tiles for layers each century, (quick demo up at: Is this what we should be using OSM for? For me OSM is for *current* data (I've been deleting any demolished buildings). This project sounds great, but should be set up as a separate entity. The database would become far to cluttered otherwise. I've an abandoned railway in my area where sections of it are now invisible having been completely leveled & used as agricultural land. Someone's tagged these as railway=abandoned. I don't think they should. Dave F. I think there are a couple of issues: 1) The OSM database is not designed with dates in mind for any purpose, even current issues such as recording a temporary diversion. 2) It does not seem to provide a way for extensions to be readily made available through the main project. So, as it stands it seems to be something of a bastardisation to add dates as no renderer will be able to cope with a non-existent building that you have added, or different versions of the same version. My initial reaction is that it would be inappropriate to add dating into the core database as it has the potential to add a significant overhead to the general usage for something that might well be viewed as a specialist application. On the other hand, it seems that OSM should embrace anything that gathers mapping data into an open database, as it might generate the killer mapping application - something that a traditional mapping view might miss. A Google search quickly brought up another historical mapping project, http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=95872 so there are interests in mapping timelines. More generally, it would seem to be a good thing to have a central repository of additional data while not burdening the core application - thinking of, for example, walking directions to add into a routing application - rather than allowing this extra information to be on external applications which leads to fragmentation of effort. I'd also suggest that this should be discussed on the main talk group as it is not GB specific. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
In my opinion historical data is definitely an important part of OSM. Yes it will get cluttered, but better tools will deal with that when it becomes a problem. Short term chronological data is beneficial anyway. For future events, new roads etc, they can be surveyed and added ahead of their official opening. And a record of recently demolished buildings etc is important otherwise there's a risk that they get re-added by someone tracing without up-to-date local knowledge. And if we have to accommodate recent events, past and future, then it should be equally possible to accommodate distant past events. 80n On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Dave F. wrote: > On 26/09/2010 23:47, Richard Palmer wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >>I'm involved in a project looking at the history of a street in >> London >>(The Strand). One of things we'd like to do is produce a 'animated' >> map >>showing the changes along it from the C18th onwards. I've had a go >> at >>adding some attributes to OSM for building dates and then generated >>different tiles for layers each century, (quick demo up at: >> > > Is this what we should be using OSM for? For me OSM is for *current* data > (I've been deleting any demolished buildings). > > This project sounds great, but should be set up as a separate entity. The > database would become far to cluttered otherwise. > > I've an abandoned railway in my area where sections of it are now invisible > having been completely leveled & used as agricultural land. Someone's tagged > these as railway=abandoned. I don't think they should. > > Dave F. > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historical Mapping in OSM
On 26/09/2010 23:47, Richard Palmer wrote: Dear all, I'm involved in a project looking at the history of a street in London (The Strand). One of things we'd like to do is produce a 'animated' map showing the changes along it from the C18th onwards. I've had a go at adding some attributes to OSM for building dates and then generated different tiles for layers each century, (quick demo up at: Is this what we should be using OSM for? For me OSM is for *current* data (I've been deleting any demolished buildings). This project sounds great, but should be set up as a separate entity. The database would become far to cluttered otherwise. I've an abandoned railway in my area where sections of it are now invisible having been completely leveled & used as agricultural land. Someone's tagged these as railway=abandoned. I don't think they should. Dave F. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
