I'll see if I can get that working.
Saikrishna Arcot
On 01/12/2014 09:47 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Saikrishna Arcot
> mailto:saiarcot...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> No, I'm just using plain XML files and the Overpass API (with a
> possible change to the full
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote:
> No, I'm just using plain XML files and the Overpass API (with a
> possible change to the full OSM extract). The thing is that in the test
> coordinates I'm passing in, there is no city returned. Would using
> Osmosis and the postgresql dat
No, I'm just using plain XML files and the Overpass API (with a
possible change to the full OSM extract). The thing is that in the test
coordinates I'm passing in, there is no city returned. Would using
Osmosis and the postgresql database include the city?
Saikrishna Arcot
On Sun 12 Jan 2014 0
Hi,
I can't recall an address import going forward over the last 1.5 years
that had building outlines and intentionally ignored them. You don't
have building outlines, so really nothing to argue about.
Thanks
Jason
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Johan C wrote:
> I'm aware that there are sever
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote:
> Note that some of the cities around here (for example, DeKalb County)
> are mixed case. Currently, the city case is just converted to title case
> (first letter capitalized, the rest lowercase). This will need to be
> corrected before the
I'm aware that there are several people on this list very much in favour of
merging address nodes to building outlines. There has been a long
discussion in October '...to merge or not to merge' on this list. I can't
distill any other conclusion from that discussion other than that there was
no cons
Please do not cross post.
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Johan C wrote:
>> But if you have the buildings, I think the consensus has been to merge
>> them in.
>
> Not quite. Consensus has been that there are two options, and that local
> communities (not individuals) can decide on the preferred
> But if you have the buildings, I think the consensus has been to merge them
in.
Not quite. Consensus has been that there are two options, and that local
communities (not individuals) can decide on the preferred option
2014/1/12 Jason Remillard
> Hi Clifford,
>
> > Building outlines will not
The source code, converted file (used in the application), and sample
files have been updated. The first two need to be downloaded (again) for
testing the application. The changes I've made is to save the log
displayed in the window to another file, add some control as to what is
output into the lo
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
> Many people, including myself, have included such tags. To my knowledge,
> no one has ever used them. Given that you don't have a process for
> updating,
> how does this plan differ?
>
> > We plan to conduct training during the upcoming #Edita
Hi Clifford,
> Building outlines will not be included this time. The original Seattle
> Import merged address nodes with the building outlines. When the building is
> torn down mappers are removing the outline and but not saving the address
> information. Often this address information is reused.
Hi Jason,
I thought I used all lowercase. I'll check and correct the naming of
addr:housenumber.
The source data also includes zip codes. This would go in addr:postcode,
correct? I can easily add this as a tag to be imported.
Part of the reason for this check is that it wouldn't make a sense for
Hi Saikrishna,
Just a quick look.
- The street number tag is addr:housenumber, not addr:houseNumber. OSM
tags don't use CamelCase
- didn't the source data also have zip codes?
- If you are going to dump an address, you should write it out into a
separate file that will be reviewed by hand. These
Hi Tiziano,
First off, I don't know about the license. Somebody else on the import
list should be able to help. Also, you can also talk to the
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group.
A good place to start is with talking to the Italian mappers (perhaps
the Italian osm mailing l
From: Clifford Snow [mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2014 10:16 PM
To: imports; Imports US
Subject: [Imports] Completion of King County Address Import
> Another difference is dropping the tag source=King County GIS. Instead
> we are including a source:addr:id = SITEID
W dniu 12.01.2014 09:31, Martin Raifer pisze:
>> Addresses were merged with existing buildings using tools written by
>> Andrew.
>
> Which tools exactly? What do those do?
https://github.com/balrog-kun/osm-addr-tools/tree/master
- addrmerge.py - compare existing adresses with new addresses and an
2014/1/12 Martin Raifer
> Addresses were merged with existing buildings using tools written by
>> Andrew.
>>
>
> Which tools exactly? What do those do?
https://gist.github.com/balrog-kun/5444208 - it merges buildings outline
with addresses, tested in previous imports, works pretty good.
--
P
Addresses were merged with existing buildings using tools written by
Andrew.
Which tools exactly? What do those do?
___
Imports mailing list
Imports@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
18 matches
Mail list logo
