[Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs mapped in the US? How does this compare to other countries? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, McGuire, Matthew matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote: Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs mapped in the US? How does this compare to other countries? When TIGER was imported it dominated the database and contributed data from all countries combined. The US community is growing and individual contributions are growing, but so are imports from other sources. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 12:05 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, McGuire, Matthew
matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote:
Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs mapped in
the US? How does this compare to other countries?
When TIGER was imported it dominated the database and contributed data
from all countries combined. The US community is growing and
individual contributions are growing, but so are imports from other
sources.
In Oregon, 48% of the objects have been most recently modified by
non-TIGER sources. Calculated this way:
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | grep -vi
tiger | awk '{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | awk '{sum
+= $1} END { print sum;}'
It's higher than I expected, personally. Not too shabby.
-- Dave
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 12:05 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, McGuire, Matthew
matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote:
Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs mapped
in
the US? How does this compare to other countries?
When TIGER was imported it dominated the database and contributed data
from all countries combined. The US community is growing and
individual contributions are growing, but so are imports from other
sources.
In Oregon, 48% of the objects have been most recently modified by
non-TIGER sources. Calculated this way:
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | grep
-vi tiger | awk '{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | awk
'{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
It's higher than I expected, personally. Not too shabby.
Is anyone from itoWorld listening on this thread? It would be handy to see a
fairly high-res map for the entirety of the lower-48 showing ways that have
tiger user in one color and other ways as gray.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
On 23 June 2010 18:12, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 12:05 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, McGuire, Matthew
matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote:
Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs mapped in
the US? How does this compare to other countries?
When TIGER was imported it dominated the database and contributed data
from all countries combined. The US community is growing and
individual contributions are growing, but so are imports from other
sources.
Hence the question for statistics.. I imagine. :)
In Oregon, 48% of the objects have been most recently modified by
non-TIGER sources. Calculated this way:
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | grep
-vi tiger | awk '{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | awk
'{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
95% of the objects in Oregon edited by myself I'd still considered
TIGER-sourced (it was a massive name= change and based on TIGER docs
only). grep -vi tiger\\\|balrog would be more accurate.
Cheers
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] NHD data skipped by nhd2osm
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Dylan Semler dylan.sem...@gmail.comwrote: I've patched the nhd2osm scripts to print details about the NHD tag conversions[1]. I'm attaching the output of the scripts with my patch applied if anyone is interested in what it does. The shp-to-osm Java app I wrote has a more complete set of NHD conversion rules here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NHD_Rules Information on the JAR is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp-to-osm.jar Are the nhd2osm scripts still being maintained? If so, I'll look into adding those rules to the nhd2osm scripts. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] NHD data skipped by nhd2osm
I've preferred Ian's java app to shp-to-osm. I just want to put a plug in for a workflow to potential NHD importers that I have arrived at after many previous mistakes. 1. Convert nhd shp for a subbasin files using shp-to-osm with max-nodes set to a very high number. This makes one big file per nhd file (waterbody, area, flowline, point, line). 2. Merge all the files in josm. Make sure you have allocated a lot of memory to josm as this can take a lot of memory. It will also take a lot of time. 3. Use validator to identify duplicate nodes. There are two main sources of duplicate nodes: a. Flowline intersections--NHD has each reach as a separate vector. These should all be merged. b. Flowline intersections with riverbanks and waterbodies. These, too should be merged. c. Shared boundaries between lakes, wetlands, riverbanks, dams and other features. I think there is some dispute what to do here. If there are two multipolygon relations involved, one shared way should be created that is a member of both relations. If there aren't two relations, I think one could either create two or simple merge nodes. I have been merging nodes. 4. Quality control. Keep in mind several things about the NHD. They are not perfect and they overlap between basins. Try your best to keep the import from duplicating others' and your own work. Using the slippy map plugin, double check that features in the import do not already exist. They could either be NHD data, which can be deleted from the new import, or another form of data--either an import such as PGS or a real human. Use judgment to determine which is the best. Based on up-to-date orthophotography I can tell that NHD is not always the best data. However, many water features input by hand are not always better either-- they are frequently hastily sketched off of Yahoo pictures and not super accurate. If you do multiple subbasins in the same basin, you will quickly notice that there is a ton of overlap in both the waterbodies and the riverbanks between different subbasins. 5. Upload the entire subbasin using josm's ability to split large changesets. If your connection is at all flaky, you may want josm to split into smaller changesets than the maximum (5 changes). Sorry for the book, but I wanted to share some of my experiences. James On Tuesday, June 22, 2010 03:56:16 pm Ian Dees wrote: On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Dylan Semler dylan.sem...@gmail.comwrote: I've patched the nhd2osm scripts to print details about the NHD tag conversions[1]. I'm attaching the output of the scripts with my patch applied if anyone is interested in what it does. The shp-to-osm Java app I wrote has a more complete set of NHD conversion rules here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NHD_Rules Information on the JAR is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp-to-osm.jar ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, McGuire, Matthew matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote: Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs mapped in the US? How does this compare to other countries? That's a hard question to answer. The easiest thing[1] would be to check the objects and changelogs for source= tags. In general the US community is growing, so you're hopefully seeing more individual mapping, but there's also an effort (and a desire by OSM US) to make imports easier- which should result in a lot more data coming in at much greater detail. - Serge [1] This isn't easy at all, of course. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] USGS Aerial Photography
I've been quite happily using the USGS's high resolution aerial photography as an underlay in JOSM, and I wanted to share instructions on how to use it (including how to avoid the parts that aren't compatible with OSM's data license) on the wiki, so I wrote this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/USGS_High_Resolution_Orthoimagery There should probably be something about source attribution on there, but I didn't want to dictate anything without establishing something of a consensus among other mappers. Are there any objections to source=USGS Ortho? I'm also not sure where best to add links to it on the wiki, though I put one from the United States WikiProject page. Other suggestions appreciated (and, of course, it is on the wiki). -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes. -- Dr. Warren Jackson, Director, UTCS --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
Using the same command on CloudMade's pennsylvania.osm, I get
1092728/1685382, i.e. 65%.
—Sven
On 23-Jun-10, at 12:12 , Dave Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 12:05 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM, McGuire, Matthew
matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote:
Does anyone know the percentage of OSM data that is imported vs
mapped in
the US? How does this compare to other countries?
When TIGER was imported it dominated the database and contributed
data
from all countries combined. The US community is growing and
individual contributions are growing, but so are imports from other
sources.
In Oregon, 48% of the objects have been most recently modified by
non-TIGER sources. Calculated this way:
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n
| grep -vi tiger | awk '{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n
| awk '{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
It's higher than I expected, personally. Not too shabby.
-- Dave
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped
In Oregon, 48% of the objects have been most recently modified by
non-TIGER sources. Calculated this way:
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | grep
-vi tiger | awk '{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
grep -o 'user=[a-zA-Z0-9]*' oregon.osm | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | awk
'{sum += $1} END { print sum;}'
It's higher than I expected, personally. Not too shabby.
and how much of it are bots? the real user edits are probably much lower
-- Dave
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] County lines vs. TIGER roads
I've noticed that the roads at county boundaries were imported separately and not connected. I know that there was an effort to connect all of the Interstates at county boundaries, and I haven't found any problems. Major roads have also been fixed. However, I've been working on the back-country roads. These are mostly tracks in the mountains. I've been connecting them manually, at least in my local area. My concern isn't about making these connections (though it would be good to have a 'bot make these fixes). What I've noticed is that where the counties change on the roads and the actual county lines don't line up. I know that the TIGER data isn't very accurate (within a few hundred feet), but the county line data seems to be low resolution. I know in my area, county lines often follow watershed boundaries. The low resolution county boundaries don't follow the ridge lines. Is there a way that we could get higher resolution county line boundaries from anywhere? I expect not, but I figured I'd ask. I'll plan to continue to correct these manually. - Val - ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] County lines vs. TIGER roads
On 23 Jun 2010, at 21:41 , Val Kartchner wrote: Is there a way that we could get higher resolution county line boundaries from anywhere? I expect not, but I figured I'd ask. I'll plan to continue to correct these manually. depends on your state and county. some offer the data for download. A good source is also USGS maps. But it's more work to trace from them. Also terraserver has many errors. - Val - ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] County lines vs. TIGER roads
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a way that we could get higher resolution county line boundaries from anywhere? I expect not, but I figured I'd ask. I'll plan to continue to correct these manually. The TIGER county boundaries should be better than the existing USGS data: http://www2.census.gov/cgi-bin/shapefiles2009/national-files For some reason the TIGER import didn't include these, nor minor types of municipalities (mainly townships - County Subdivision (Current) in the by-state downloads), but did have those silly census-designated places. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] County lines vs. TIGER roads
On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 01:22 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a way that we could get higher resolution county line boundaries from anywhere? I expect not, but I figured I'd ask. I'll plan to continue to correct these manually. The TIGER county boundaries should be better than the existing USGS data: http://www2.census.gov/cgi-bin/shapefiles2009/national-files For some reason the TIGER import didn't include these, nor minor types of municipalities (mainly townships - County Subdivision (Current) in the by-state downloads), but did have those silly census-designated places. Ah, so it USGS county lines that were imported. Can we get TIGER county lines imported instead, if they're more accurate? They should at least match the county assignments on the roads. We should leave the import to someone more experienced than me though. And what would we do about the county lines that have already been edited? - Val - ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
