Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I have started some time ago to add wikidata tags manually myself and have
> found that there are a few problems to be careful about. Will you be
> checking the matches you have found to see if there would be contradictions
> between single
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I have started some time ago to add wikidata tags manually myself and have
> found that there are a few problems to be careful about. Will you be
> checking the matches you have found to see if there would be contradictions
> between single
Hi Bob,
They all seem to be made up of multiple ways. I noticed that Bix and
Assendon has role=outer consistently applied, whereas the others have no
explicit role on the ways. This is implicitly equivalent to role=outer
but having explicit roles for the members in a relation may be
considered
Also nearby there are what used to be two separate single-sex schools which are
now combined as a mixed school. Two sites about a mile apart.
You should use the site relation for this. I was doing this for a lower and
upper school in Southend, until I realised that the lower school had closed
So, should we be using the full school name or abbreviating 'church of
england voluntary aided' to CEVA as they do on the school pullovers?
Similar questions for other variations - I've seen CE, CoE, C of E for
example.
I've been leaving existing names in the main (occasionally adding VC or VA)
On 17/01/16 20:34, Neil McManus wrote:
> It seems I am not the only one with this problem. I too have been
> contributing to the quarterly project by adding a few more schools in
> West Lothian and have come across a problem where two schools share the
> same building. They have a few sites where
Bob,
Glad to be of assistance.
One tiny word of warning when you add role=outer: please make sure you
do it to ALL the ways (without a role) in a relation, because a mix of
empty roles and role=outer in the same relation will definitely cause
more problems than simply having empty roles!
You
On 17/01/16 18:17, Edward Betts wrote:
> Wikipedia has an article about a village called Brailes, but OSM has nodes for
> two villages, Upper Brailes and Lower Brailes. The matcher solves this problem
> by picking the civil parish.
Helps if you answer ;)
This is actually one of the sites I had
Lester Caine wrote:
> If there is not a node for a village in the OSM data, then it needs
> adding. While wikipedia may return the same page for the village and the
> matching parish, I thought that wikidata should distinguish between a
> village record and a parish one?
For
I've no idea if it does but it sure feels like Northwich Hartford Campus takes
the biscuit with respect to shared resource. 6 schools plus the college
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.2475/-2.5302. I have some cleaning up
and more work to do on it which I'm leaving until I've done a
On 17/01/16 17:28, Steve Doerr wrote:
> One possible approach is simply to draw each school's boundary so as to
> include the shared area (i.e. overlapping). If that's not possible, then
> it implies that the shared area really 'belongs' to one of the schools
> and the other one merely 'borrows'
On 17/01/16 20:42, Ed Loach wrote:
> So, should we be using the full school name or abbreviating 'church of
> england voluntary aided' to CEVA as they do on the school pullovers?
> Similar questions for other variations - I've seen CE, CoE, C of E for
> example.
I've been changing them to match
Lester Caine wrote:
> If there is not a node for a village in the OSM data, then it needs
> adding. While wikipedia may return the same page for the village and the
> matching parish, I thought that wikidata should distinguish between a
> village record and a parish one?
For
Colin
The answer might lie with role=outer. I applied it to Nettlebed in JOSM as a
test, uploaded the change and ran a new query in Overpass turbo. Nettlebed
appears as a polygon now. It seems I should apply it to all my cases for best
practice, as you write, because it does appear other
On 17/01/16 18:17, Edward Betts wrote:
> Wikipedia has an article about a village called Brailes, but OSM has nodes for
> two villages, Upper Brailes and Lower Brailes. The matcher solves this problem
> by picking the civil parish.
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact -
On 17/01/16 17:06, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> Please remove the School list from this. We are currently adding the
>> > edubase references to each of these, and this will replace the need for
>> > an additional wikidata tag. Better to just have the one primary reference.
> There is no restriction
Hi,
It seems I am not the only one with this problem. I too have been
contributing to the quarterly project by adding a few more schools in
West Lothian and have come across a problem where two schools share the
same building. They have a few sites where catholic and
non-denominational
On 17/01/16 00:08, alasd...@dunakin.me.uk wrote:
> I'd like some advice please on how to tag 2 Schools that use the
> one site.
Lester replied:
> What I've done initially is tagged the buildings of each part with the
> correct name and ref:edubase tag, and not put a tag on the site
> boundary.
Although I'm uncertain of a perfect solution as both the entrance and
recreation ground appears to be shared in Ed's example, I find there's
usually a defining boundary around schools that are adjacent to each
other. Especially infant schools where they don't want the little ones
wandering
On 17/01/16 12:40, Dave F. wrote:
> Although I'm uncertain of a perfect solution as both the entrance and
> recreation ground appears to be shared in Ed's example, I find there's
> usually a defining boundary around schools that are adjacent to each
> other. Especially infant schools where they
Lester Caine wrote:
> On 17/01/16 11:08, Edward Betts wrote:
> > This is the list of Wikidata tags that I actually plan to add:
> >
> > https://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/west_midlands/matches_2016-01-16.txt
>
> Please remove the School list from this. We are currently
Here in West Yorkshire, I have a newly-rebuilt Beckfoot School, sharing
the site and facilities with Hazelbeck Special School. As far as I know,
there isn't anything dividing the two. Robert has these entries for them
(thanks Robert - great job!):
139975 BD16 1EE
On 17/01/2016 13:46, Colin Spiller wrote:
Here in West Yorkshire, I have a newly-rebuilt Beckfoot School,
sharing the site and facilities with Hazelbeck Special School. As far
as I know, there isn't anything dividing the two.
I'd be /very/ surprised if there wasn't a protect barrier around a
On 17/01/16 13:36, Edward Betts wrote:
>> And there should be individual nodes for each village so not sure where the
>> > relations come from?
> The villages matching relations are the civil parishes. The Wikidata item
> represents both the village and the civil parish. This happens when the
>
On 17 January 2016 at 12:55, Lester Caine wrote:
> Please remove the School list from this. We are currently adding the
> edubase references to each of these, and this will replace the need for
> an additional wikidata tag. Better to just have the one primary reference.
I am working hard (manual labour!) on the OSM coverage of Civil
Parishes, but they will never cover 100% of England due to large swathes
being unparished. Don't forget to distinguish between Civil and
Ecclesiastical parishes - they have been steadily diverging for over 100
years...
//colin
On
On 17/01/2016 12:55, Lester Caine wrote:
On 17/01/16 11:08, Edward Betts wrote:
This is the list of Wikidata tags that I actually plan to add:
https://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/west_midlands/matches_2016-01-16.txt
Please remove the School list from this. We are currently adding the
edubase
Hi Bob,
I have been doing a lot of work looking after admin boundaries in the UK
in the last few years, including adding many thousands of Civil Parish
relations.
Admin boundaries are represented by relations with type=boundary.
Syntactically these are similar to multipolygons, whereby the
28 matches
Mail list logo