Re: [talk-ph] Highlighting the OSMPH community
Dear Lu, Years ago, I made a similar interview to some mappers [0]. It would be nice to check (in case you interview the same people) if they still have the same views. :) [0] https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/tag/osmphmapper/ On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Lu Sevier lmsev...@email.wm.edu wrote: Hello OSMPH Community, My name is Lu Sevier and I am AidData Summer Fellow working with Map the Philippines here in Manila this summer. In the past few weeks I have had the chance to meet some of your members and have been extremely impressed by your OSM-PH community. I would love to highlight your community in an upcoming post in The First Tranche, the AidData blog. I would love to tailor this blog post to the training and volunteer work you have done in country and highlight upcoming projects. I think this blog could bring more volunteers and publicity to your fantastic group. If you are interested, I would also like to interview (over email) anyone with the following questions. How long have you been a part of OSM community? What aspects of mapping are you most interested in? How did you become interested in mapping? What is your area of specialty or current job? How big is the current mapping community and how often do you guys meet up (virtually or in person)? Is there anything you would like people to know about OSM in the Philippines, especially how they can contribute or get involved? Also, feel free to add any suggestions as I am trying to spread the word about OSM and am still learning. Any and all constructive criticism would be much appreciated. Thank you for your help and time, Sincerely, -- -Lu Sevier The College of William and Mary http://www.linkedin.com/pub/lu-sevier/84/236/725 ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ http://twitter.com/maningsambale -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations
Rally, Maning is asking about the administrative centres, and that would mean government authorities in charge of administration. They are not meant to represent the [geographic] center of the village which isn't something we normally map. As for place=village nodes, and like I wrote earlier, I put them in the commons (e.g. plaza, local park, etc.). Erwin *Erwin Olario* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - » email: erwin@ er...@ngnuity.net*n**gnu**IT**y**.**net* http://ngnuity.net/ | gov...@gmail.com » mobile: (PHL): +63 908 817 2013 » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE 3A93 D56B On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Rally de Leon rall...@gmail.com wrote: Question: - What's the best practice for adding admin_centre nodes to the village boundary relation? Should it be the barangay hall (amenity=townhall) or the place=village node? For place nodes, a good practice IMHO is putting said node (eg. place=village) somewhere NEAR but NOT ON an object or group of objects which represents the center of the village, typically any of the following: -barangay hall -village plaza (eg. where there's a multipurpose hall or basketball court) -the center of traditional grid-street (the oldest populated area of the place) My interpretation of somewhere near is around 100-150 meters away; on a not-so-important space (eg. a vacant area or generic community) in the vicinity, where there are no other place nodes, or important landmarks like a park or institution. 1st Reason: The 'place node' is represented by a TEXT on the map. -a rendered TEXT always cover the lines and polygons under it. Thus, putting a place_node very close to another object (eg. important building), will essentially make that building disappear (information visibility is not optimized). Said buildings will only appear when you zoom-in on a digital map. But you cannot zoom-in on a paper map (2-D). So I thought, the best practice is to move it just enough not to cover important objects (part of the art). (until such time we have an algorithm to do that automatically) 2nd Reason: Putting a place node inside a polygon with a large footprint the size of a neighborhood, like an institutional_polygon or a park; will not just potentially cover the 'name' of institution or park, but add unintended confusion or misrepresentation of the polygon. eg. If you put a place_node of Ermita inside Rizal Park's valencia circle, a tourist who wants to go to the heart of Ermita, ends up in Luneta (which is technically Ermita) - but was not probably his/her intention 3rd Reason: There are some LGU's (municipal and barangays) which relocated (or isolated) their new townhalls away from the village or town centers. Putting a place_node on top or near an isolated townhall (away from populated center) is not always representative of the general location of the village or the town. (this is a dilemna for Mamasapano, where townhall is located near the boundary) --- I'm voting +1 for: place=village as admin_centre, provided it's located NEAR not ON the object (amenity=townhall) Cheer, Rally ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations
Erwin, Confused: I thought all along that the subject about the admin-polygon-relation's center (whatever that means). :-) That normally, in the absence of a member 'admin_centre' node in the relation, the name-TEXT of that administrative polygon is rendered in its geometric center. BUT, assigning a node as the admin_centre of an administrative_relation, will for some reason render the TEXT value at the assigned 'location' of said node. Which in most cases happens to be the place_name. Isn't that the idea of Maning's question? h What's the difference if there's any? can you explain? (with example please - yung pang elementary) for the benefit of the likes of me who are too lazy to read the manual, hehe Rally On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Erwin Olario gov...@gmail.com wrote: Rally, Maning is asking about the administrative centres, and that would mean government authorities in charge of administration. They are not meant to represent the [geographic] center of the village which isn't something we normally map. As for place=village nodes, and like I wrote earlier, I put them in the commons (e.g. plaza, local park, etc.). Erwin *Erwin Olario* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - » email: erwin@ er...@ngnuity.net*n**gnu**IT**y**.**net* http://ngnuity.net/ | gov...@gmail.com » mobile: (PHL): +63 908 817 2013 » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE 3A93 D56B On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Rally de Leon rall...@gmail.com wrote: Question: - What's the best practice for adding admin_centre nodes to the village boundary relation? Should it be the barangay hall (amenity=townhall) or the place=village node? For place nodes, a good practice IMHO is putting said node (eg. place=village) somewhere NEAR but NOT ON an object or group of objects which represents the center of the village, typically any of the following: -barangay hall -village plaza (eg. where there's a multipurpose hall or basketball court) -the center of traditional grid-street (the oldest populated area of the place) My interpretation of somewhere near is around 100-150 meters away; on a not-so-important space (eg. a vacant area or generic community) in the vicinity, where there are no other place nodes, or important landmarks like a park or institution. 1st Reason: The 'place node' is represented by a TEXT on the map. -a rendered TEXT always cover the lines and polygons under it. Thus, putting a place_node very close to another object (eg. important building), will essentially make that building disappear (information visibility is not optimized). Said buildings will only appear when you zoom-in on a digital map. But you cannot zoom-in on a paper map (2-D). So I thought, the best practice is to move it just enough not to cover important objects (part of the art). (until such time we have an algorithm to do that automatically) 2nd Reason: Putting a place node inside a polygon with a large footprint the size of a neighborhood, like an institutional_polygon or a park; will not just potentially cover the 'name' of institution or park, but add unintended confusion or misrepresentation of the polygon. eg. If you put a place_node of Ermita inside Rizal Park's valencia circle, a tourist who wants to go to the heart of Ermita, ends up in Luneta (which is technically Ermita) - but was not probably his/her intention 3rd Reason: There are some LGU's (municipal and barangays) which relocated (or isolated) their new townhalls away from the village or town centers. Putting a place_node on top or near an isolated townhall (away from populated center) is not always representative of the general location of the village or the town. (this is a dilemna for Mamasapano, where townhall is located near the boundary) --- I'm voting +1 for: place=village as admin_centre, provided it's located NEAR not ON the object (amenity=townhall) Cheer, Rally ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Highlighting the OSMPH community
6 from this list are OSM PH contributors including Maning. http://www.s1expeditions.com/2013/09/100-philippinemappingadvocates.html Ervin Malicdem for Schadow1 Expeditions a Filipino must not be a stranger to his own motherland. http://www.s1expeditions.com On Jul 2, 2015 2:21 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Lu, Years ago, I made a similar interview to some mappers [0]. It would be nice to check (in case you interview the same people) if they still have the same views. :) [0] https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/tag/osmphmapper/ On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Lu Sevier lmsev...@email.wm.edu wrote: Hello OSMPH Community, My name is Lu Sevier and I am AidData Summer Fellow working with Map the Philippines here in Manila this summer. In the past few weeks I have had the chance to meet some of your members and have been extremely impressed by your OSM-PH community. I would love to highlight your community in an upcoming post in The First Tranche, the AidData blog. I would love to tailor this blog post to the training and volunteer work you have done in country and highlight upcoming projects. I think this blog could bring more volunteers and publicity to your fantastic group. If you are interested, I would also like to interview (over email) anyone with the following questions. How long have you been a part of OSM community? What aspects of mapping are you most interested in? How did you become interested in mapping? What is your area of specialty or current job? How big is the current mapping community and how often do you guys meet up (virtually or in person)? Is there anything you would like people to know about OSM in the Philippines, especially how they can contribute or get involved? Also, feel free to add any suggestions as I am trying to spread the word about OSM and am still learning. Any and all constructive criticism would be much appreciated. Thank you for your help and time, Sincerely, -- -Lu Sevier The College of William and Mary http://www.linkedin.com/pub/lu-sevier/84/236/725 ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ http://twitter.com/maningsambale -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations
Question: - What's the best practice for adding admin_centre nodes to the village boundary relation? Should it be the barangay hall (amenity=townhall) or the place=village node? For place nodes, a good practice IMHO is putting said node (eg. place=village) somewhere NEAR but NOT ON an object or group of objects which represents the center of the village, typically any of the following: -barangay hall -village plaza (eg. where there's a multipurpose hall or basketball court) -the center of traditional grid-street (the oldest populated area of the place) My interpretation of somewhere near is around 100-150 meters away; on a not-so-important space (eg. a vacant area or generic community) in the vicinity, where there are no other place nodes, or important landmarks like a park or institution. 1st Reason: The 'place node' is represented by a TEXT on the map. -a rendered TEXT always cover the lines and polygons under it. Thus, putting a place_node very close to another object (eg. important building), will essentially make that building disappear (information visibility is not optimized). Said buildings will only appear when you zoom-in on a digital map. But you cannot zoom-in on a paper map (2-D). So I thought, the best practice is to move it just enough not to cover important objects (part of the art). (until such time we have an algorithm to do that automatically) 2nd Reason: Putting a place node inside a polygon with a large footprint the size of a neighborhood, like an institutional_polygon or a park; will not just potentially cover the 'name' of institution or park, but add unintended confusion or misrepresentation of the polygon. eg. If you put a place_node of Ermita inside Rizal Park's valencia circle, a tourist who wants to go to the heart of Ermita, ends up in Luneta (which is technically Ermita) - but was not probably his/her intention 3rd Reason: There are some LGU's (municipal and barangays) which relocated (or isolated) their new townhalls away from the village or town centers. Putting a place_node on top or near an isolated townhall (away from populated center) is not always representative of the general location of the village or the town. (this is a dilemna for Mamasapano, where townhall is located near the boundary) --- I'm voting +1 for: place=village as admin_centre, provided it's located NEAR not ON the object (amenity=townhall) Cheer, Rally ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
[talk-ph] Data Quality Overview
This is a nice OSM data quality overview tool: http://osm.hlidskjalf.is/ I asked the developer to add the Philippines [0]. I have a couple of ideas on using this for remote mapping, more on that later. For an overview of the tool, here's the post [1]. [0] http://osm.hlidskjalf.is/settlements.php?idc=1 [1] http://joi.betra.is/?p=1769 -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ http://twitter.com/maningsambale -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Data Quality Overview
Maning, What does it mean when there's a value on the right column under subregion? Does it mean there's an administrative boundary for the particular town? http://osm.hlidskjalf.is/settlements.php?idc=1region=Rizalsub=p=town Rally On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:05 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: This is a nice OSM data quality overview tool: http://osm.hlidskjalf.is/ I asked the developer to add the Philippines [0]. I have a couple of ideas on using this for remote mapping, more on that later. For an overview of the tool, here's the post [1]. [0] http://osm.hlidskjalf.is/settlements.php?idc=1 [1] http://joi.betra.is/?p=1769 -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ http://twitter.com/maningsambale -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
[talk-ph] Fwd: Invitation to the WGODS of the NDRRMC
FYI, This is part of the series of workshops under SIIEM in partnership with DSWD which Eugene and Jules attended last year [0]. Anyone, interested to represent the OSM-PH community? [0] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2014-July/005216.html -- Forwarded message -- From: ERIC Project eric.p...@gmail.com Date: Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:48 PM Subject: Invitation to the WGODS of the NDRRMC To: emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com Dear Mr. Sambales, We would like to invite you to the Workshop on Geospatial and Other Data Standards organized by the Response Pillar of the NDRRMC on July 10, 2015 at the GT- Toyota Asian Center, University of the Philippines, Quezon City. Attached is the official invitation letter signed by DSWD Assec Vilma Cabrera and the draft program for your reference. We would appreciate receiving your confirmation on or before July 7, 2015 through Ms. Lora Lee Bittner at tel nos 0917-7464005 or 0922-7701926. Thank you. Sincerely, BONG GRAJO Project Coordinator -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ http://twitter.com/maningsambale -- -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ http://twitter.com/maningsambale -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
