Re: [Talk-GB] Trig Point references

[Gregrs]

Hi all,

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:58:28PM +0100, Simon Ritchie wrote:

Hmm.  Good point.  Most of the data in Ian's database is contributed by 
the trigpointers - reports of visits to the trigs.  Most of the data 
about the actual trigs on the site (position etc) comes from the OS.  
See this page 
https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/gps/legacy-control-information/triangulation-stations,
which says "This data, which is no longer maintained, is available for 
use under Open Government Licence Terms."


That page provides a downloadable CSV  giving the names used by the OS.
position, type, status etc.  However, the names starting TP seem to be
created by Ian, so I think he owns them, just as Royal Mail owns the
postcode data.


You may also be interested in this page on my user area of the OSM wiki:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Gregrs/Ordnance_Survey_triangulation_stations

Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes

[Gregrs]

Hi Jack,

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 05:30:41PM +, Jack FitzSimons via Talk-GB wrote:

What if one of those sources (say FHRS) shows the correct postcode but 
more obvious sources (e.g. the company website) shows an old postcode? 
I can use the correct postcode but it is likely to be changed back to a 
wrong one by a mapper who has only found the obvious source.


I don't have answers to all your questions but it might be worth 
mentioning that the not:addr:postcode tag can be useful to record 
incorrect postcodes. I usually pair this with the note tag to explain my 
choice of correct postcode.


The FHRS/OSM comparison tool at 
https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/ makes use of this tag so that 
FHRS establishments can still be successfully matched with OSM entities 
even when the FHRS postcode is incorrect, which does happen on occasion.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Hi everyone

[Gregrs]

Hi Bart,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:24:44PM +0100, BD wrote:

I have to say that I'm a bit surprised with the mailing list being 
used instead of forum, which would allow for easier search and access 
to the information.


If you are looking for something specific, you could always do a Google 
search like this:


site:lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb example

This will look up 'example' on only the talk-gb mailing list archive.

Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Farmland colour change

[Gregrs]

Hi Martin,


Many thanks to whoever did this.


Here's the related pull request on Github:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3327

Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Updates to 'Survey Me!' tool

[Gregrs]

Hi Colin,


Oh and another where the fhrs listing has the wrong postcode!


Please add the wrong postcode using not:addr:postcode and add a note to 
say that the FHRS postcode disagrees e.g. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/391878897. The comparison tool will 
recognise this and will no longer list it as a postcode mismatch.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Updates to 'Survey Me!' tool

[Gregrs]

Hi Colin,

I know of a local business which has closed but is still listed in 
gregrs tool. What can I do about it?


Thanks for your question. If the building is still unused, perhaps you 
could leave the fhrs:id tag in place and add a disused: prefix (see 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:). If the building has 
changed use, you could tag with old:fhrs:id. The comparison tool won't 
currently recognise this but there is a feature request open 
(https://github.com/gregrs-uk/python-fhrs-osm/issues/50) and it will 
serve as a warning to other mappers.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

[Gregrs]

Hi Rob,

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 03:58:37PM +, Rob Nickerson wrote:

I don't think it has been mentioned, but having the link to FHRS is one 
way of keeping on top of changes in places where we have fewer active 
mappers. That is, by monitoring for changes in FHRS we can identify 
closures, takeovers, new cafes etc (assuming a detectable change in the 
source data). In a way this is similar to the ref:navads tag that was 
added to Shell petrol station data -> it is now a much simpler task of 
finding out what has changed by comparing to third party data thus 
allowing mappers to hone in on relevant areas.


If anyone wants to have a go at building something that would be 
amazing. Similarly we still have the idea of visualising a "crap data" 
map floating around (e.g. map of Lloyds TSB, map of Total petrol 
stations, BHS etc..). 


FHRS is certainly a good way to keep on top of changes, and in fact you 
can already use my FHRS/OSM comparison tool 
[https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/] to view fhrs:id tags that 
don't currently match an establishment in the FHRS database, such as an 
establishment that has closed down. You can look out for red blobs on 
the map (which may also be matched OSM entities with mismatched/missing 
postcodes) or examine the table with the heading 'Mismatched fhrs:id 
tags'.


Hope it's useful.

Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

[Gregrs]

Hi all,

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 01:12:07PM +, Mark Goodge wrote:

If there has been a change of ownership, then yes, the old FHRS rating 
doesn't carry over to the new one. So it would need to be deleted from 
OSM as well.


Whilst it's great to include the fhrs:id for an establishment and 
perhaps the fhrs:authority, it's generally not considered useful to 
store ephemeral data such as the FHRS rating in OSM as this can change 
regularly and it's fairly simple to fetch this for a particular 
establishment using the FHRS API given the fhrs:id.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

[Gregrs]

Hi all,

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 12:36:34AM +, Dave F wrote:

I've been prefixing them with disused: as the fhrs:id will be probably 
be updated after a new review. I found keeping the old one was useful 
as a checking reference.


Prefixing with disused, old or not could be useful. (I haven't checked 
which is in more frequent use.) EdLoach added an issue for the FHRS/OSM 
comparison tool that suggests the use of not:fhrs:id. Whilst the 
functionality he describes isn't currently supported by the tool, I will 
try to get round to adding it at some point: see 
https://github.com/gregrs-uk/python-fhrs-osm/issues/50


I've also compiled a list of disused: objects to send to my LA's 
hygiene team in an attempt to get them to update their database. Not 
much luck with that.


If you're on Twitter, it might be worth tweeting @drsiant (Head of 
Information Management at FSA) as she seems keen for this sort of 
exchange of information.


I would also agree with Colin that you should definitely leave the 
address data in place. Also the source:addr=FHRS Open Data should be 
left in place if present and probably added if not present.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Website Data

[Gregrs]

Hi Paul,

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 01:15:08PM +, paulmgill...@gmail.com wrote:

If store data can be pulled from directly from a company's public 
facing website ('store finder' page) is there any reason we can't do 
such imports without discussion with/permission from the company 
concerned?


I believe the problem is licencing. Just because the data is publicly 
accessible on a company's website doesn't mean that it has been released 
under a licence compatible with that of OpenStreetMap. In practice I 
would imagine that most companies would be pleased to have the locations 
of their stores/branches on OpenStreetMap, but another issue is that 
some of the data might be derived from other sources such as a Royal 
Mail database.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Adding unmapped postcodes using FHRS data

[Gregrs]

Hi all,

Using Robert Whittaker's excellent postcode stats (available in an 
interactive form here: http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postcodes/stats/), 
I've created a list of the FHRS establishments that have a postcode 
which currently hasn't been assigned to any objects in OpenStreetMap. As 
part of the addresses Quarterly Project, this should provide an easy way 
to increase our postcode coverage and improve POI address data at the 
same time.


You can download a list for each postal area as a CSV file (which you 
can open with Microsoft Excel or OpenOffice Calc, for example) here:


http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-unmapped-postcodes/

If this proves useful I will try to update it fairly regularly.

Best wishes,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] fixme:addr* tags from FHRS comparison tool

[Gregrs]

Dear all,

The FHRS comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/) 
adds fixme:addr1, fixme:addr2, etc. tags when a user clicks 'Add tags in 
JOSM' because it can't (yet?) figure out which parts of the address 
should go into which addr: tag. The idea is that mappers should make 
this decision and copy the relevant part of each address into 
addr:housenumber, addr:street, addr:city, etc. However, it's easy to 
forget to do this occasionally.


If you think you might have forgotten to change some fixme:addr tags or 
if you are adding addresses for the Quarterly Project, I would encourage 
you to look out for these tags and fix them where possible. It's easy to 
find them using the new Overpass Turbo download function in JOSM; simply 
enter the following into the Query Wizard:


"fixme:addr1"=* or "fixme:addr2"=* or "fixme:addr3"=* or "fixme:addr4"=*

You can then use a filter to remove any nodes/ways that you have already 
fixed using the following pattern:


"fixme:addr2" OR "fixme:addr1" OR "fixme:addr3" OR "fixme:addr4"

Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

I've been in touch with the FSA and I'm glad to say that the geocodes 
for many establishments in Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, 
Portsmouth and South Tyneside are back, so their data can be accessed 
using the comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) 
again.


Stirling is still missing a large number of geocodes, I'm afraid, but 
this has been a long standing issue as shown on 
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/district-334.html.


Thanks,
Greg


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 03:52:20PM +0100, Gregrs wrote:

Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth 
and South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of 
their FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff 
towards the end of the first graph on this page: 
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html. I'm 
planning to contact the FSA regarding this as the comparison tool 
relies on these geocodes in order to place establishments into a 
specific district and show their approximate location.


--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

Hi David,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 05:15:25PM +0100, David Woolley wrote:

Using postcode centroids is why so many self contributed business POIs 
on Google Maps are almost useless for finding the business.  I hope 
no-one is adding POIs based on such data.


I agree. This is why the comparison tool 
(http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) doesn't allow users to copy 
the location of FHRS establishments into JOSM, only to copy tags for an 
establishment which is suggested as a match for an existing OSM node/way 
or is already matched using an fhrs:id but has a mismatched postcode.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

Hi Robert,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:22:35PM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
wrote:



If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode
centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In
fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are
at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments
with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so
presumably that's how many of the  coordinates have been
computed in the first place.)


Thanks for your email. Yes, I'm pretty sure that's how the locations 
have been derived in most cases and the comparison tool coalesces nearby 
establishments into a single marker position and displays a list in the 
popup for that reason.


If the FSA aren't able to solve the problem, I may add another stage of 
processing to the comparison tool and look up postcode centroids.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

Hi David,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:03:11PM +0100, David Woolley wrote:


Is it possible that they were using NPLG data, that is not open?


I'm not sure; it seems to be reverse-geocoded from postcode centroids 
(which is one reason I wouldn't recommend anyone directly copying FHRS 
data into OSM without some manual processing). I have contacted the FSA 
to see what can be done.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

The FHRS/OSM comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) 
now includes graphs showing progress for each district (e.g. 
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/district-91.html) and for the 
whole of Great Britain 
(http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html). 
Feel free to report bugs or suggest improvements here: 
https://github.com/gregrs-uk/fhrs-osm-stats.


Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth 
and South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of 
their FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff 
towards the end of the first graph on this page: 
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html. I'm 
planning to contact the FSA regarding this as the comparison tool relies 
on these geocodes in order to place establishments into a specific 
district and show their approximate location.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Schools with fhrs:id

[Gregrs]

Hi Lester,

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 08:33:07PM +0100, Lester Caine wrote:


Bigger collage complexes may well have additional catering outlets
across multiple campuses which need separate objects for each campus,
building and potentially each identifiable outlet. It should not be a
problem identifying each outlet and since the FHRS data is open licence
http://ratings.food.gov.uk/enhanced-search/en-GB/Rugby%20School/Rugby/Relevance/0/%5E/%5E/1/1/20
provides every inspection point and the raw data can be download from
http://ratings.food.gov.uk/OpenDataFiles/FHRS319en-GB.xml and a couple
of the 8 entries for Rugby School are at the same postcode. So one needs
separate objects to hold these fhrs:id records rather than the campus
boundary.

Bottom line ... there should be separate objects where that is necessary
and it would be nice if the larger operations such as Rugby School
helped with detailed campus maps as many of the collage and university
sites have been doing?


I agree that in the case of more complex campuses each separate FHRS ID 
should be attached to the relevant building if possible, and I think 
that the associated postcode should also be attached to that building 
rather than to the school boundary in these cases. This is what I have 
done in the case of Rugby School (with the added bonus of local 
knowledge) and it seems to work well e.g. Stanley House within Rugby 
School: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/259571188.


The comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/) can also 
be used to visualise the location of each FHRS inspection point 
(although these aren't always geographically accurate as within the FHRS 
data they are based on the location of the postcode centroid), whether 
this inspection point has been linked to an OSM node/way using the 
fhrs:id tag and whether the postcodes match. My hope is that this should 
remove the need to download the data manually.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Schools with fhrs:id

[Gregrs]

Hi Dave,

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 06:43:25PM +0100, Dave F wrote:

In my LA they have pre/post school 'clubs' listed separately. I've been 
adding them as nodes within the school as amenity=club. I'm open to 
suggestion if there's something better for them.


You could add all the FHRS IDs to the school boundary separated by 
semicolons but I'm afraid this isn't yet supported by the comparison 
tool: https://github.com/gregrs-uk/python-fhrs-osm/issues/11.


One advantage of what you're currently doing is that the clubs get 
mapped as an amenity too.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Schools with fhrs:id

[Gregrs]

Hi Colin,

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 03:17:49PM +0100, Colin Spiller wrote:

Most of the school information is tagged to the school boundary. 
However, I would expect the fhrs:id tag to be on the relevant building 
within the boundary, but the comparison tool - thank you gregrs - 
expects both the postcode and the fhrs:id on the same object. So is 
that the standard - both on the boundary, and is it documented in the 
wiki anywhere? I thought I had better check before I did too many 
updates!


Thanks for raising this, Colin. This GitHub issue is partly relevant: 
https://github.com/gregrs-uk/python-fhrs-osm/issues/42#issuecomment-272649433. 
As of January, it was more common to add the addr:postcode tag to the 
school boundary rather than a relevant building.


I think it makes sense for both fhrs:id and addr:postcode to be on the 
same entity, whether that's the boundary or a building. In some cases 
schools might have more than one building with an fhrs:id, but it's 
possible that these would have a different postcode e.g. the different 
houses at Rugby School (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/363617437).


The comparison tool should cope with the fhrs:id tag being on either the 
boundary or building, as long as both fhrs:id and addr:postcode tags are
on the same entity. It will suggest matches based on the centroid of the 
school boundary but will pick up existing matches on either.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly project - Feedback to Food Standards Agency?

[Gregrs]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

>> A while someone said the Food Standards Agency were aware of the
>> FHRS quarterly project & would welcome feedback or any errors. Did
>> anything get formalised? I've a file of data for my area to pass on,
>> but obtaining a contact within my Local Authority is proving rather
>> difficult.

I haven't formalised anything either, but I would be happy to provide
CSV files from database queries if that would help e.g. a list of FHRS
establishments marked on the comparison tool as having a postcode error.

One other problem with FHRS data that doesn't show up on the comparison
tool is a duplicate FHRS ID (because these fail the primary key
constraint on import and are therefore dropped). I can get a list of
these from running the server scripts manually if that would help.

>I haven't done anything with the data, but I've generally made a point
>of adding not:addr:postcode=* when I came across an incorrect postcode
>in the FHRS data. If others did the same, the comparison tool at
>http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/ could presumably make use of
>such tags and provide a list of postcode errors for each district. (It
>could also use the presence of such a tag to suppress/de-emphasize the
>postcode mismatch errors it reports.

Thanks for that idea, Robert. I have added an issue on GitHub
<https://github.com/gregrs-uk/python-fhrs-osm/issues/44>. I won't have
time to add this feature in the near future but may be able to have a
look over the summer. Contributions from others are always welcome, of
course.

In the meantime, I guess we could create an Overpass Turbo query for
entities with both an fhrs:id and not:addr:postcode tag to generate a
list.

Thanks,
Greg

- -- 
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A 
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJY+bLlAAoJEB7WhxSLszZllGAH+wV1wDDJ2JUKkHY2KHQPWVSo
VLZfgv8Ucu4zvixKACgR3Ig/GDA132iolfRj7+cITV0h1tZndrSAcLu5GyemBKB+
TZGag68z8mNgam63wHDS1ft0Bst/CW+FMjxFOsvW6rFlCs0ewlZmizOhw5haD3h4
hCZwWozG89hXq3iCbyIkCrJjEYgc26Eka/Ck0VM4iHwcyrcEz8J1MW9GoctKWGN6
K+x7E9Htqj8163oWm9RT4Tt8n7EgzfzjIOueCE91lDTmbx7S/SQxq/L52tKVowUr
iIV/ZPF1TgHTAbV/dWQwHmdCe6O7ZPNFT59r6ChrzNPdn8YNC2ud6Ru3pP6svBk=
=Uhid
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] StyleSheet for Outdoors Rendering

[Gregrs]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi Graham,

>I want to produce some large (A3 sized at least) printable maps for
>outdoors use. It is actually to show the route of a cross country race,
>so I want to show fences, gates stiles, embankments, steps, as well as
>land cover and contour lines / hill shading (but not distractions like
>admin boundaries)
>
>Is there a published carto style available that will show these sort
>of things available that I could use as a basis for this, rather than
>start from scratch? (maybe free-map.org.uk, but I'm not sure if that
>shows field boundaries etc?)

I made a start on a carto style for outdoor use in GB at 1:25k scale but
there is still some way to go. You're welcome to have a look, though:

https://github.com/gregrs-uk/gb-leisure-carto

If nothing else, it might give you some ideas about adding contour lines
using OS Terrain 50 data and perhaps grid lines using Charles Roper's
1km grid shapefile.

>Last time I did this sort of thing I used a simple python script
>called generate_image.py - is that still the best thing to use or has
>something else taken its place?

I find Nik4 (https://github.com/Zverik/Nik4) useful, and if you
don't want to integrate contours and grid lines using Mapnik, you
might also be interested to know that QGIS can add the latter
with some flexibility. I also wrote the print-osgb.py script (see
https://github.com/gregrs-uk/gb-leisure-carto) which you may find useful
if you're using the OSGB projection.

Best wishes,
Greg

- -- 
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A 
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJY2pXpAAoJEB7WhxSLszZlKJwH/1P1N/dIJYBmMzTyWFMFzTaj
dUpJlV14g7laLoQWyaEJZ4I/1s+o5E5NhIljbsP9MH7MCboCXr4x2zJvrdBNXlck
T+hKbj9GIFYR5Cme2r8RxRWxb3uI1RdsUMHSs5mp4T3dtSuqIKG3MC43J+iON4Vn
aDymYQdTo4yoyk1Je8xVMyHJH3nVJNK6YXBkThoy0UiV3MhqCoLhG3opER8QnmIf
wVj0BfZF1x52AYrtuzmA1qE71DvX3HgeILlltIpr5xfLLgxCqQQ3CfxgDUDHVlNS
T8vu1x6Fuohlhp9ecEUjSnQ7gZJs+sOwjKtesj+queLhMtCNQadM/xdHzMs13tY=
=kIdV
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Quarterly Project 2016 Q4 graphs and statistics

[Gregrs]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Dear all,

Now that we've come to the end of the Quarterly Project for 2016 Q4 – 
which involved using Food Hygiene Rating Scheme data to improve the 
density of POIs, addresses and postcodes (see 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2016_Q4_Project:_Food_Hygiene_Ratings) 
– I've updated the progress graphs and annotated them to provide 
detailed statistics on the impact of the project. Please do have a look 
at the following link:

<http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/graphs.html>

I hope that you will continue to use my FHRS/OSM comparison tool at 
<http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/> and spread the word about it 
to other mappers. Please continue to report bugs or suggest features at 
<https://github.com/gregrs-uk/python-fhrs-osm>. I don't always have time 
to respond to these immediately, but having more mappers using the tool 
and adding GitHub issues has meant that I have been able to steadily 
improve the tool as the project progressed. As ever, if anyone would 
like to contribute code I am always happy to review pull requests on 
GitHub.

Happy mapping!

Greg

- -- 
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A 
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYaVw7AAoJEB7WhxSLszZl68sH/R9SquYrSPO51rRi2zNZc2AF
SFazRQVGTO05T9iDwP+E1I+QpXuUtZbdcZyYcScr3zKFR7ss5zBIv68xQALpN70k
oo+TYe89HkPxSnkzDSTywrqTSG4ZQ4QRbKVLZF4hnMFTOCKzvtpdJzLHEVcS3kxs
P9JvNzTZpR/PalT1+xa/CAoWr420ML98jKVD7JZ/Y7WKt4EkkdZbigppzVKlLlq/
beqIIkUA6z7xIog/7XrSHb1Y/4rY2cHhwVHVrYe0zkjO3ZkMppB8xEGAaMocOGwM
tAo/wn1akV+YozCZwsAbSvKI3YXdQ4dcA2Y+lyBs3SQiaEgWsn6Bq+0UpfqQn9I=
=7hv0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM point of interest counts in each district as a proportion of FHRS

[Gregrs]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

My apologies Andrew, I somehow managed to send a blank email from your 
address as a result of typing something into the wrong window and 
inadvertently triggering a key command!

Sorry for the unnecessary noise... Happy New Year!

Greg

- -- 
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A 
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYaQi1AAoJEB7WhxSLszZlLBwH/2fOC0ZDMLA8UKsxR2pAfZwD
ZTwslNRWvJwLtNOzi4eAIv4SCNRqwOM4Wu6VPCpp+sl57ggyV23n7EUgdQXJi5Q7
SiCDCkbYDnUn8NMAW3jsxeLQ89L92l1aeUIfnon87eEXauWu6lyi7dVzbve/N+Qv
WkBXTKgkrcZM8URB6SjNKOTCelNGMSzB0fNujOg1te8e/84yul9m4oo/vSqs/He6
ItJNrNsF9t83vIkwQsUd4Hz/EwJKTcyUpoBd6n407QhfkP1Dpsg87FGeun50JB8n
2UaSpMaLR4IYBHvqFkKh9JDRBAW7yGarYjwUbjA592NW0LdvHGsftWsA8zpItGk=
=nbeK
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[Gregrs]

Good point. “FHRS Open Data” seems the most common according to taginfo…

Thanks,
Greg


> On 28 Nov 2016, at 22:36, Robert Norris <rw_nor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Another thought about tagging is when using JOSM what value(s) should be put 
> in the changeset source field.
> 
> So far I've been using "FHRS" rather than the full name expansion.
> -- 
> Be Seeing You - Rob.
> If at first you don't succeed,
> then skydiving isn't for you. 
> From: Gregrs <gre...@fastmail.co.uk>
> Sent: 28 November 2016 22:15:23
> To: Robert Norris
> Cc: Talk GB
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project
>  
> Thanks Rob. I hope you don’t mind me CC’ing the Talk-GB list.
> 
> I’ve updated the wiki page 
> [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System 
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System>] a bit but 
> the recommendations for tagging are a bit out of date compared with what’s 
> been discussed on the list more recently. It seems generally accepted that we 
> shouldn’t add transient data such as the rating.
> 
> I wonder if someone might be able to update the wiki page linked above?
> 
> Rob – I’d be happy to add a link at some point once it’s a bit more up to 
> date. (I’ll add a GitHub issue just to remind me!)
> 
> Thanks,
> Greg
> 
> 
>> On 28 Nov 2016, at 21:48, Robert Norris <rw_nor...@hotmail.com 
>> <mailto:rw_nor...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> At the bottom of the comparison tool, is it worth adding a link back to the 
>> Wiki page - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System 
>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System> - about 
>> FHRS and the best tagging practice?
>> 
>> I didn't think this was worth a github issue <OutlookEmoji-��.png>
>> 
>> -- 
>> Be Seeing You - Rob.
>> If at first you don't succeed,
>> then skydiving isn't for you. 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[Gregrs]

Thanks Rob. I hope you don’t mind me CC’ing the Talk-GB list.

I’ve updated the wiki page 
[http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System] a bit but 
the recommendations for tagging are a bit out of date compared with what’s been 
discussed on the list more recently. It seems generally accepted that we 
shouldn’t add transient data such as the rating.

I wonder if someone might be able to update the wiki page linked above?

Rob – I’d be happy to add a link at some point once it’s a bit more up to date. 
(I’ll add a GitHub issue just to remind me!)

Thanks,
Greg


> On 28 Nov 2016, at 21:48, Robert Norris  wrote:
> 
> At the bottom of the comparison tool, is it worth adding a link back to the 
> Wiki page - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System 
>  - about 
> FHRS and the best tagging practice?
> 
> I didn't think this was worth a github issue 
> 
> -- 
> Be Seeing You - Rob.
> If at first you don't succeed,
> then skydiving isn't for you. 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb