Re: [Tagging] wikidata <> other ref

The use case with Wikidata for me is an app/website based on OSM that wants to link to other sources for more information. The main example is the historic place (http://gk.historic.place) website. They display all historic items. In order to make it easy on the user of that website to learn more

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

2017-11-28 20:47 GMT+01:00, Andy Mabbett : > Then you are not paying attention. OSM IDs are volatile - far more > volatile than Wikipedia IDs, let alone Wikidata IDs. > >> Again my suggestion: Working on better ways to address features in OSM >> in a stable way from the

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > Given that the Overpass API exists, do we have a worked example > here to demonstrate that external tools have a ready way of accessing > 'wikidata' tagged items within OSM? > This is quite easy to implement

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > This is just a question on editors managing that. Right now the > inheritance of IDs is usually not a conscious choice of the mapper but > if this is deemed desirable this could be changed. > > [...] > > OSM recruits

Re: [Tagging] wikidata <> other ref

Le 28. 11. 17 à 21:29, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > Having nonvolatile ID's for ways really is technically infeasible it's impossible but here it is "s/toT" a id that match all osm id for highway "Avenue des Champs-Élysées" in Paris taged as node, way, type=associatedStreet relation and type=route.

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > The only advantage i see is from the wikidata side that the > responsibility of dealing with a data change is superficially delegated > to the mapper in OSM with wikidata tags but it is an illusion that this > will

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

What I take away from the discussion is that wikidata tags are somehow evil and that who insists on mapping them, should make sure to encapsulate way features in relations (associatedStreet, river, site, etc). I'll refrain from creating proposal pages on the wiki for part_of:wikidata. To me it

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > > > Great! Let us know when you have a working solution, consensus to > > implement it, and tools that work with it. > > Having nonvolatile ID's for ways really is technically infeasible. > Ways get split and recombined all the time, and their

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > On 28 November 2017 at 16:40, Christoph Hormann wrote: >> The problem is OSM is a map of the physical world, not a map of the >> world's databases. If Wikidata wants to create links between OSM

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > The problem is OSM is a map of the physical world, not a map of the > > world's databases. If Wikidata wants to create links between OSM > > and other databases that is great but so far i think no one has > > made a good case why this linking

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

On 28 November 2017 at 19:32, José G Moya Y. wrote: > This response makes me wonder if there is a way to mark the "thermoking not > allowed to park" sign I've read in some gas station truck parkings. I couldn't find a temperature control tag or any similar tag in taginfo

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On 28 November 2017 at 16:40, Christoph Hormann wrote: > The problem is OSM is a map of the physical world, not a map of the > world's databases. If Wikidata wants to create links between OSM and > other databases that is great but so far i think no one has made a good > case

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

On 28 November 2017 at 12:58, Simon Poole wrote: > In general the access categories and rules for "traffic at rest" are > different, than for moving traffic. > > As to sign C, 3a (Vienna convention), the OSM access wiki page is a bit > unclear in that it doesn't clearly state that

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

This response makes me wonder if there is a way to mark the "thermoking not allowed to park" sign I've read in some gas station truck parkings. I imagine there are "dangerous goods no" and "dangerous goods designated" tag values, also. El 28/11/2017 18:10, "Paul Johnson"

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Tod Fitch wrote: > > Maybe because OSM does not have the concept of a permanent ID for > feature in the real world so there is no way for other databases to > maintain the linkage. I have discussed this subject already, please read what i wrote about it in:

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 8:40 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > The problem is OSM is a map of the physical world, not a map of the > world's databases. If Wikidata wants to create links between OSM and > other databases that is great but so far i think no one has made a good >

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Selfish Seahorse wrote: > On 28 November 2017 at 11:26, Georg Feddern wrote: > > Yes, unfortunately the european common-in-use traffic sign "VEHICLES > > PROHIBITED EXCEPT MOTORBIKE/SIDECAR" or "Prohibited for

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

the discussion has completely veered off course. question was part_of <> relation and not wikidata <> other linking system Le 28. 11. 17 à 15:25, Jo a écrit : > I like relations as much as the next guy, probably more so. I've been > editing and correcting thousands upon thousands of them. One

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > > However, once two or more other authoritative databases refer to the > same object, then it already passes the Wikidata threshold for > notability. In this case, it makes better sense to create the > Wikidata item for that object, link

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > * Wikidata is definitely not suited as an universal meta-database > > connecting OSM with other open data sets. This is because of the > > Notability concept > > (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability)

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On 28 November 2017 at 15:08, Kevin Kenny wrote: > I just got an idea that is either insigntful or stupid, and I'm not sure > which. The former > But then it occurred to me: our idea of 'Wikidata reference Q314159265' > is 'the set of objeccts tagged with

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On 28 November 2017 at 14:36, Kevin Kenny wrote: > I would need to understand the use cases and > what value they add to the map P.S. The key here is to understand the concept of "linked data" [1], or rather "linked, open data" [2]. In other words, making inline

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

> But wikidata tags are the way to link to Wikipedia. It's not possible to > link from Wikidata to OSM, due to the unstable nature of our ids and the 3 > "namespaces" for nodes/ways/relations. I just got an idea that is either insigntful or stupid, and I'm not sure which. Wikidata, it appears,

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > [...] > but Wikidata is increasingly becoming a central hub for linking > various disparate databases together via their primary identifiers. As said before this is not correct regarding data as we have it in OSM or in most other

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On 28 November 2017 at 14:36, Kevin Kenny wrote: > Wikidata, to me, is mysterious. > I don't believe that I've ever actually seen an application that > uses it * Google Search uses it * Google Translate uses it * The BBC website uses it * The Quora website uses it

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Jo wrote: > Smaller rivers don't have river relations, but they are still usually > composed of several ways. (They are often split for tunnel=culvert). You are free to create a relation for a river/stream of any size. Of course if the waterways have no names there

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > ... but I don't believe that I've ever actually seen an application that > uses it, and don't have a real understanding of how it is used and what can > be done with it that cannot be done without it. Like OSM,

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On 28 November 2017 at 13:41, Frederik Ramm wrote: > On 28.11.2017 14:13, Andy Mabbett wrote: >>> the established rule not to have external IDs in the >>> OSM database >> >> What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and how? > It's certainly not an

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> > the established rule not to have external IDs in the >> > OSM database >> >> What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and >> how? > > I am

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

I should have known I was opening a gigantic can of worms here... Anyway, I like relations as much as the next guy, probably more so. I've been editing and correcting thousands upon thousands of them. One hing I can tell you: they are fragile. It wouldn't hurt to have some redundancy and

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > the established rule not to have external IDs in the > > OSM database > > What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and > how? I am sorry for the ambiguous wording - as Fred said i meant essentially a custom - calling it

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

Hi, On 28.11.2017 14:13, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> the established rule not to have external IDs in the >> OSM database > > What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and how? Let's say "established custom". Using a search engine of your choice, you'll find things like

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On 28 November 2017 at 12:18, Christoph Hormann wrote: > the established rule not to have external IDs in the > OSM database What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and how? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

Hi, On 28.11.2017 12:34, Jo wrote: > Grouping objects in associatedStreet and river relations (and adding > wikidata identifiers on them) partly solves this, but associatedStreet > wasn't liked much and is pretty much dead in the water I'd be worried that adding a part_of:wikidata key would have

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

On Tuesday 28 November 2017, Jo wrote: > > Grouping objects in associatedStreet and river relations (and adding > wikidata identifiers on them) partly solves this, but > associatedStreet wasn't liked much and is pretty much dead in the > water and in the river relations, only the linear features

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

Hello, Le 28. 11. 17 à 12:34, Jo a écrit : > The wikidata key itself should only occur on a single OSM object. > When trying to add it to linear features, this poses a problem, as it's > possible to split such features. isn't that like having the same problem as the is_in tag ? Wouldn't it be

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

In general the access categories and rules for "traffic at rest" are different, than for moving traffic. As to sign C, 3a (Vienna convention), the OSM access wiki page is a bit unclear in that it doesn't clearly state that when used in a prohibitory fashion "motorcar" includes all other dual

[Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

Hi, I would like to propose a new key: part_of:wikidata The wikidata key itself should only occur on a single OSM object. When trying to add it to linear features, this poses a problem, as it's possible to split such features. Grouping objects in associatedStreet and river relations (and

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

On 2017-11-28 11:26, Georg Feddern wrote: > Am 28.11.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > On 27. Nov 2017, at 13:51, Selfish Seahorse wrote: > > Sorry for asking again, but does anyone know if motorcar=no implies > that there is no access for all multi-track

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Am 28.11.2017 um 11:54 schrieb Selfish Seahorse: On 28 November 2017 at 11:26, Georg Feddern wrote: Yes, unfortunately the european common-in-use traffic sign "VEHICLES PROHIBITED EXCEPT MOTORBIKE/SIDECAR" or "Prohibited for any double-tracked motor vehicles" has no

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

On 28 November 2017 at 11:26, Georg Feddern wrote: > Yes, unfortunately the european common-in-use traffic sign "VEHICLES > PROHIBITED EXCEPT MOTORBIKE/SIDECAR" or "Prohibited for any double-tracked > motor vehicles" has no equivalent in the OSM access scheme. > I think it

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Huh? access=motorcar is for motorhomes? That's not the way I interpreted it. I thought a motorcar was the same as an automobile, like a family car. A motorhome is a large vehicle that's suitable to live in. That's from an American English perspective. Dave Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Am 28.11.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: On 27. Nov 2017, at 13:51, Selfish Seahorse > wrote: Sorry for asking again, but does anyone know if motorcar=no implies that there is no access for all multi-track motor vehicles

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

sent from a phone > On 27. Nov 2017, at 13:51, Selfish Seahorse wrote: > > Sorry for asking again, but does anyone know if motorcar=no implies > that there is no access for all multi-track motor vehicles or only for > motorcars? In case hgv are permitted I’d