Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
2013/6/17 Anthony o...@inbox.org It's not about mapping the sign, it's about mapping the neighborhood based on the sign. We don't map speed limit signs, we map the speed limits on the roads based on the signs. where do you get this from? We are indeed mapping speed limits signs (additionally to the speed limits on the roads and based on these signs). The purpose is verifiability and ease of mapping. You often don't register every single sign in the first survey, and having the sign locations really simplifies further maxspeed mapping on the road. There is even a JOSM-mappaint-style to show the right speed limit sign (maxspeed signs). We also map other signs, e.g. city limits signs: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/traffic_sign We don't map individual trees, we map forests. also here we do actually both. The tag to map a tree is natural=tree, and there are subtags to refine with details (e.g. species, denotation, ...) We don't map keep out, military area signs, we map military areas. I agree as long as you can draw the whole area in one go/ based on one survey, but if you only did your surveys bit by bit I'd recommend to start mapping military area signs in order to reconstruct the whole boundary after you have collected enough of them. cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote: The sort of signs in the link below are precisely the sort of thing we put in OSM, or at least have historically. https://www.cityoftulsa.org/**community-programs/** neighborhoods/neighborhood-**sign-guide.aspxhttps://www.cityoftulsa.org/community-programs/neighborhoods/neighborhood-sign-guide.aspx There is certainly no problem mapping the *sign*. The sign is verifiable objective. And the data is indexable and useful to map users, not just to mappers. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
In Nashville, TN, where I live, most of the city's growth has been since World War II, and hence suburban in nature. Some subdivisions have permanent signs, some don't. Some have a discernable tree structure, some have a loose grid, a few areas have a rectilinear grid. Plus, some areas combine later development with what used to be small towns, swallowed up as the city expanded. Some areas have names picked by a modern developer, some are named after these old towns, and at least one area is named after a particular pre-Civil-War mansion that, for decades, was the largest house in the neighborhood. So, the neighborhood naming scheme is best described as all of the above. Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org wrote: I've driven all over Cincinnati's northeastern suburbs collecting subdivision names, the ones that adorn signs and gates at subdivision entrances. I used to hear school bus drivers use the same names when communicating their progress over the radio. These subdivisions are only meaning of neighborhood that makes sense in an area with endless sprawl. Upon returning to my armchair, I trace individual landuse=residential polygons for each of these subdivisions. It's easy to discern the boundaries because most subdivisions aren't connected. Where they are, one can easily spot where sidewalks end, one cookie cutter architecture gives way to another, or the pavement quality changes -- some cities repave one whole subdivision at a time. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On 2013-06-15 6:51 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 6:35 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: For the former, I don't need a painted line on the ground, just what the City GIS department publishes on the open Internet, after these lines/polygons/neighborhood boundaries were reached by public process. There is a growing number of OSM folks in the United States (myself included) who believe that government provided boundry data should be used for data products such as rendered maps and geocoders, but do not belong in OSM's core dataset (which is built around the idea of improvements based on local, verifiable observation). The result is that for data of the type you're talking about (government provided polygons), I think they'd be best provided as a third party service. And for the more subjective neighborhood boundaries, by its nature, it doesn't belong in OSM either. Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org writes: But there's a third kind of neighborhood data: objective data that doesn't come from a government database. (and continues): Different cities developed in different ways. OSM should encourage neighborhood data curated by locals aware of the city's history. Perhaps this kind of data is more suitable for display, while algorithmic solutions may be better for geocoding. In my opinion, Minh's thoughtful discussion here is an outstanding (short) treatise supporting reasonable wide definitions (nodes, polygons, government data, directly on the ground observable data: differing histories of city and neighborhood development needing a rich set of multiple syntax) for neighborhood data in OSM. Again, this is not a one solution fits all situations problem, in this thread we have seen that over and over. Let's continue to allow OSM to capture observable data (including aerial and satellite imagery) and local government-produced data alike, whether as nodes or polygons, as appropriate. Many other features allow for both types of data structures, neighborhoods really are no different. Algorithms which simply (wrongly, in many cases) extrapolate a neighborhood derived from a centroid deserve what they get: often erroneous answers as to the question is THIS in this neighborhood? Let them tune their geocoding algorithms to be more clever instead, and answers will surely become more correct. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On 2013-06-15 6:51 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: There is a growing number of OSM folks in the United States (myself included) who believe that government provided boundry data should be used for data products such as rendered maps and geocoders, but do not belong in OSM's core dataset (which is built around the idea of improvements based on local, verifiable observation). Stevea replied: Again, this is not a one solution fits all situations problem, in this thread we have seen that over and over. Let's continue to allow OSM to capture observable data (including aerial and satellite imagery) and local government-produced data alike, whether as nodes or polygons, as appropriate. Many other features allow for both types of data structures, neighborhoods really are no different. One thing that seems to be missing from Serge's analysis is that much of government collected data is based on local, verifiable observation. If the government decides that Blah Neighborhood consists of the blocks bounded by Foo Street, Bar Road, Whatever River, and Whichamajig Railroad, and then they create a polygon geocoding that, the government has used local, verifiable observation to create that polygon. And they aren't going to get it exactly right. OSM mappers very well might come along and fix the border which corresponds to Whatever River, for instance. I'm not aware of any government node, way, or polygon data in OSM, whose presence is not disputed, where there isn't some tie to local, verifiable, observable, on-the-ground features. State borders are not truly defined by latitudes and longitudes. That is to say, even in places where a border is historically defined as the 40th parallel or some specific latitude, the true legal border does not lie exactly in that location. Someone may have historically measured the border incorrectly, and that measurement sticks as the legal definition. The latitude of the border may have shifted over time due to movements in the underlying ground or continental plate. I can't think of any border which is legally defined in terms of latitude and longitude. And any border which isn't legally defined in terms of latitude and longitude can be surveyed based on local, verifiable observation. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
It's not about mapping the sign, it's about mapping the neighborhood based on the sign. We don't map speed limit signs, we map the speed limits on the roads based on the signs. We don't map interstate signs, we map the name of the interstate. We don't map individual trees, we map forests. We don't map keep out, military area signs, we map military areas. On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 3:05 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote: The sort of signs in the link below are precisely the sort of thing we put in OSM, or at least have historically. https://www.cityoftulsa.org/**community-programs/** neighborhoods/neighborhood-**sign-guide.aspxhttps://www.cityoftulsa.org/community-programs/neighborhoods/neighborhood-sign-guide.aspx There is certainly no problem mapping the *sign*. The sign is verifiable objective. And the data is indexable and useful to map users, not just to mappers. ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
What a fantastic post! I am a neighborhood guru, as mapping subdivisions is part of my job description at Baltimore County Government. i have several years experience mapping neighborhoods in the legal sense in an ESRI GIS environment, and have translated some of that to OSM in my spare time. When our data goes CC0, I'm going to look into making an 'imagery' layer of plat outlines so that people can trace them if they want. A few quick points (some are not unique): * Neighborhood can mean a fluid place OR a platted subdivision with defined legal boundaries. I find the former to be the case in cities where land was not conveyed by plat in 1600-1900s, but rather by deed or some other asinine instrument. The large tracts that became city neighborhoods don't tend to have a definitive plat thus people come up with their own names. Meanwhile, the latter is generally the case in suburbs, especially the ones that sprang up after WW2. By then, plats were the requirement, not just the norm, and developers thought of cute names like 'Placid Acres' which stuck with the community. HOAs reinforce this. * place=neighborhood vs place=hamlet: The TIGER import as I understand it uses the place=hamlet (silly british name). PLACE=NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT RENDERED (https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/4191) and thus I haven't changed place=hamlets to neighborhood here. Hamlet has no meaning in Baltimore except perhaps where Robin Hood might live. * It makes sense that Zillow has the good data because real estate is all about location, and everyone wants to be in the desirable 'neighborhood.' Many of these boundaries are set by govs. People don't always agree, and new buyers may find themselves on the 'wrong side of the tracks' despite the listing being in the good area. That's all for now. -Elliott - http://about.me/elliottp | http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ElliottPlack -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Neighborhoods-Zillow-tp5764954p5765851.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On 15/giu/2013, at 21:16, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: What are you using to verify your neighborhood boundaries? Is there literally a line on the pavement showing the boundaries? the boundaries of settlements and parts of them often follow natural and or man made limits (topography), but it might not be true in every case, it depends on a lot of different factors like history, culture, local terrain topography, political settings, ... cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On 2013-06-15 6:51 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 6:35 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: For the former, I don't need a painted line on the ground, just what the City GIS department publishes on the open Internet, after these lines/polygons/neighborhood boundaries were reached by public process. There is a growing number of OSM folks in the United States (myself included) who believe that government provided boundry data should be used for data products such as rendered maps and geocoders, but do not belong in OSM's core dataset (which is built around the idea of improvements based on local, verifiable observation). The result is that for data of the type you're talking about (government provided polygons), I think they'd be best provided as a third party service. And for the more subjective neighborhood boundaries, by its nature, it doesn't belong in OSM either. But there's a third kind of neighborhood data: objective data that doesn't come from a government database. I've driven all over Cincinnati's northeastern suburbs collecting subdivision names, the ones that adorn signs and gates at subdivision entrances. I used to hear school bus drivers use the same names when communicating their progress over the radio. These subdivisions are only meaning of neighborhood that makes sense in an area with endless sprawl. Upon returning to my armchair, I trace individual landuse=residential polygons for each of these subdivisions. It's easy to discern the boundaries because most subdivisions aren't connected. Where they are, one can easily spot where sidewalks end, one cookie cutter architecture gives way to another, or the pavement quality changes -- some cities repave one whole subdivision at a time. The result is a map that's actually informative at z14 (though still incomplete due to time constraints). Here's Mason and Deerfield Twp., OH: http://mc.bbbike.org/mc/?lon=-84.3252lat=39.32121zoom=14num=4mt0=mapnikmt1=google-map-mapmakermt2=nokia-mapmt3=waze-us In nearby Loveland, Google and Nokia copied names like Historic West Loveland and West Loveland North out of the city's GIS. But those names are only used by city planners, a pitfall of relying solely on government sources: http://mc.bbbike.org/mc/?lon=-84.28872lat=39.27345zoom=14num=4mt0=mapnikmt1=google-map-mapmakermt2=nokia-mapmt3=waze-us In Cincinnati proper, we've started to map admin_level=10 boundaries corresponding to the city's community councils. (Not all cities are large enough to have such an organized system.) They are a very relevant form of administration, so it makes sense to map their jurisdiction inasmuch as we already indicate the city limits. Most of the boundaries are reinforced by an Interstate, steep hillside, river, rail yard, or other obvious feature, or at least by a major thoroughfare. Some correspond to villages annexed wholesale. Some even pass the welcome sign test. But not all match real neighborhoods as residents understand them: CUF combines three neighborhoods, while The Heights is a controversial legal fiction (centered around the University of Cincinnati). We've decided to map place=neighborhood independently of CUF's administrative boundaries and include non-UC portions of The Heights in University Heights (one of CUF's three neighborhoods). Different cities developed in different ways. OSM should encourage neighborhood data curated by locals aware of the city's history. Perhaps this kind of data is more suitable for display, while algorithmic solutions may be better for geocoding. -- Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org Jabber: m...@1ec5.org; Blog: http://notes.1ec5.org/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/6/14 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com The OSM node could even link to a wiki page where the neighborhood can be described in all its richness and complexity. you could do this with wikipedia links. My usecase would be to enter an address in a search field and get information about the neighbourhoods the results are located in. Given the huge differences in shape and extension of place areas I'd rather prefer an unprecise and to some extend subjective polygon than a node that doesn't convey the necessary information to get an idea where it is valid for (especially in a setting like osm, where you always have missing information bits). A point node plus a wikipedia link hits maybe 95% of the use cases, and is clean. I think polygons just mess things up. But if you insist :-) here's a way to ensure they don't overlap. Just distort the map a bit. Nobody will mind :-) [image: Inline image 1] ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I wonder if it time to accept that we are unable to reach a consensus. Can we agree to let the local community decide which way to proceed? They are in the best position to know the issues surrounding neighborhood borders. There didn't seem to be any show-stoppers in the arguments for nodes/polygons. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: I wonder if it time to accept that we are unable to reach a consensus. Can we agree to let the local community decide which way to proceed? They are in the best position to know the issues surrounding neighborhood borders. There didn't seem to be any show-stoppers in the arguments for nodes/polygons. Maybe not a show stopper, but that trivializes the debate. The OSM convention of verifiable mapping is an important one, I think the project deviates from this to short term gain but long term detriment. Encouraging mapping of a invisible boundary is problematic. Often that boundary will be unverifiable, fluid and opinion-based. Encouraging yet more mapping clutter of large areas is a problem due to poor tool support (we've got landuse, administrative, watersheds, and now neighborhoods). The best one can hope for is that neighborhoods would finally break things so bad that editing software would start to hide those layers for most editing purposes. There IS a wiki talk page on this http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Neighbourhood And here is sample node that I feel works, even though the aera is fluid. It hits the majority of the use cases I've heard of for OSM, and links to a proper description of a concept that's just not as simple as a polygon: place=neighbourhood name=SoMa name_1=South of Market website=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_of_Market,_San_Franciscohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_of_Market,_San_Francisco ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Your entire argument is based on the premise that neighborhood boundaries are subjective and unverifiable, and while that may be true for your neighborhood it is not true for mine. So why shouldn't I map what I can easily verify on the ground? Bryce On Jun 15, 2013, at 7:54 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: I wonder if it time to accept that we are unable to reach a consensus. On what issue are we unable to reach a consensus? The original proposer, Martijn, after reading the arguments put forth, has decided he agrees with both Ian and myself. Can we agree to let the local community decide which way to proceed? They are in the best position to know the issues surrounding neighborhood borders. There didn't seem to be any show-stoppers in the arguments for nodes/polygons. There were several issues brought up. The issues brought up were: 1. The idea that in many neighborhoods around the country, everything about these neighborhoods is subjective, and largely driven by opinion and real estate agents. 2. Neighborhoods don't have clear boundries, so polygons were a poor fit. 3. OSM is not a good place for non-observable data of any sort. 4. There is not a way to have consensus on a neighborhood boundary because of its subjective nature. Two individuals may share entirely differing views and both have equal correctness, since it's a matter of opinion. 5. Places can, and often are part of multiple neighborhoods, and OSM's place classification system doesn't handle this. 6. Nodes are bad substitutes for polygons because one can only assume that a node's idea of an area corresponds to a radius, which isn't the case in many cases. 7. There are wonderful tools and existing datasets which OSMers can use to capture this same information. OSM is not entirely built around consensus, but I'm concerned because I don't know how you can measure the local community in its opinion. I'm also a bit concerned when the idea of community consensus is thrown out the window for total localism. While I agree that sometimes things should be done without every single member of the community approving, we should strive for larger community building when possible. - Serge ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Bryce Cogswell bryc...@yahoo.com wrote: Your entire argument is based on the premise that neighborhood boundaries are subjective and unverifiable, and while that may be true for your neighborhood it is not true for mine. So why shouldn't I map what I can easily verify on the ground? What are you using to verify your neighborhood boundaries? Is there literally a line on the pavement showing the boundaries? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
My city kindly places identification signs along the borders of many of the defined neighborhoods. Other neighborhoods are coterminous with a particular subdivision. Still others like midtown are mean whatever the person saying it wants it to mean. The former are reasonable to map. The latter is not. Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Bryce Cogswell bryc...@yahoo.com wrote: Your entire argument is based on the premise that neighborhood boundaries are subjective and unverifiable, and while that may be true for your neighborhood it is not true for mine. So why shouldn't I map what I can easily verify on the ground? What are you using to verify your neighborhood boundaries? Is there literally a line on the pavement showing the boundaries? ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Bryce Cogswell writes: Your entire argument is based on the premise that neighborhood boundaries are subjective and unverifiable, and while that may be true for your neighborhood it is not true for mine. So why shouldn't I map what I can easily verify on the ground? +1: this is true for me as well, so I agree. Well, it is verifiable by what our local government says (through the consensus of public process, like City Council meetings) via polygons, AND by the more vaguely-defined but still useful nodes, of which there are several in my city. This both democratizes and harmonizes neighborhoods without making defining all of them a free-for-all (in my city, anyway -- in yours, well, there are both good and bad examples in OSM). For the former, I don't need a painted line on the ground, just what the City GIS department publishes on the open Internet, after these lines/polygons/neighborhood boundaries were reached by public process. For the latter, these are fluid enough that they can come and go, move and change name. Once again: OSM accommodates by storing, displaying (uniquely!) and indexing both types of data. While this discussion is good, I don't think a one polygon (or one node) fits all solution will work across the very wide diversity of neighborhoods in the USA. Accordingly, let us allow some minor small smears of syntax (multiple solutions) to capture multiple semantics. It doesn't hurt anything, and nobody pretends there is a standard way to properly map every single thing in OSM we wish to map, just high-quality representations of things (which are all of captured in the database, rendered, and indexable). Both polygons and nodes for neighborhoods do all three of those, and sometimes a polygon is better than a node (or vice versa), so I continue to believe using both is OK. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 3:35 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: +1: this is true for me as well, so I agree. Well, it is verifiable by what our local government says (through the consensus of public process, like City Council meetings) via polygons, AND by the more vaguely-defined but still useful nodes, of which there are several in my city. This both democratizes and harmonizes neighborhoods without making defining all of them a free-for-all (in my city, anyway -- in yours, well, there are both good and bad examples in OSM). For the former, I don't need a painted line on the ground, just what the City GIS department publishes on the open Internet, after these lines/polygons/neighborhood boundaries were reached by public process. For the latter, these are fluid enough that they can come and go, move and change name. Once again: OSM accommodates by storing, displaying (uniquely!) and indexing both types of data. While this discussion is good, I don't think a one polygon (or one node) fits all solution will work across the very wide diversity of neighborhoods in the USA. Accordingly, let us allow some minor small smears of syntax (multiple solutions) to capture multiple semantics. It doesn't hurt anything, and nobody pretends there is a standard way to properly map every single thing in OSM we wish to map, just high-quality representations of things (which are all of captured in the database, rendered, and indexable). Both polygons and nodes for neighborhoods do all three of those, and sometimes a polygon is better than a node (or vice versa), so I continue to believe using both is OK. +1 -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
2013/6/14 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com The OSM node could even link to a wiki page where the neighborhood can be described in all its richness and complexity. you could do this with wikipedia links. My usecase would be to enter an address in a search field and get information about the neighbourhoods the results are located in. Given the huge differences in shape and extension of place areas I'd rather prefer an unprecise and to some extend subjective polygon than a node that doesn't convey the necessary information to get an idea where it is valid for (especially in a setting like osm, where you always have missing information bits). Cheers, Martin -- Martin Koppenhoefer (Dipl-Ing. Arch.) Via del Santuario Regina degli Apostoli, 18 00145 Roma |I|I|I|I|I|I|I|I| Italia N41.851, E12.4824 tel1: +39 06.916508070 tel2: +49 30 868708638 mobil: +39 392 3114712 mobil: +49 1577 7793740 m...@koppenhoefer.com http://www.koppenhoefer.com Hinweis: Diese Nachricht wurde manuell erstellt. Wir bemühen uns um fehlerfreie Korrespondenz, dennoch kann es in Ausnahmefällen vorkommen, dass bei der manuellen Übertragung von Informationen in elektronische Medien die übertragenen Informationen Fehler aufweisen. Wir bitten Sie, dies zu entschuldigen. Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of koppenhoefer.com unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@koppenhoefer.com Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
David Blackman and Nathaniel Kelso et al. have worked tirelessly on building tools to make border polygons and tools around them. Let's use those tools for this sort of stuff and use the resulting shapes when rendering OSM data. I'm not familiar with these people or the tools you mention. May we have a pointer or examples? Thanks. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I missed the quattroshapes talk, and did not get to talk to Aaron about you are here. I am now convinced (and also excited) that there's better ways to do this than duplicating this effort in OSM. On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Eric Brelsford ebrelsf...@gmail.comwrote: * quattroshapes http://quattroshapes.com/, and a talkhttp://vimeopro.com/openstreetmapus/state-of-the-map-us-2013/video/68099836Kelso and Blackman gave about it last weekend at SOTMUS. * you are here https://youarehere.spum.org/, which is a bit different but has a similar intent. eric On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:30 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: David Blackman and Nathaniel Kelso et al. have worked tirelessly on building tools to make border polygons and tools around them. Let's use those tools for this sort of stuff and use the resulting shapes when rendering OSM data. I'm not familiar with these people or the tools you mention. May we have a pointer or examples? Thanks. SteveA California __**_ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
The reasons *not* to use the Zillow dataset are clear: nobody but zillow can edit it, and it is based on low quality TIGER data. The flickr dataset is similarly suspect, if this is any indication: http://boundaries.tomtaylor.co.uk/#23512042 It shows San Francisco's *SoMA* (South of Market) extending north of Market. And Mission Bay extending past Mission Bay. And.. and... a thousand other problems. --- OSM is just not a good place for opinion: and neighborhood boundaries in many many places are a matter of *opinion*. I'd say think like a map user. Clearly you want to be able to enter *SoMA* into a search engine an get at least some idea where it is. Using nodes for neighborhood names hits a large fraction of the use case, with a small fraction of the problems of polygons. I'd say that OSM should have neighborhood names as *nodes*. Then conflate or link to other databases that have richer data. The OSM node could even link to a wiki page where the neighborhood can be described in all its richness and complexity. *OpenNeighborhoodNotes.org?osm_id=23424234* anyone? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Am 12.06.2013 um 03:06 schrieb Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us: One reason for including boundaries is querying to determine what exists in a neighborhood. Another is to see the result from a search using nominatim. A single node doesn't really tell much of a story, while a boundary give a better scope of the neighborhood. It might be more compelling for 3rd parties to use our information if we included the boundaries. They in turn give us greater visibility. And while the boundaries may not be exact, people can always change them! +1, you could still calculate the center point. IMHO places at the edge of a neighborhood might also belong to both of them, and overlapping areas would reflect this. Even if a boundary is not perfect it still is much better than a node who really leaves too much room open to speculation about its actual extension. Cheers, Martin___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Am 12.06.2013 um 06:21 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com: Your reply really doesn't address what William is saying, which is that neighbourhood boundaries are subjective. I think we all agree that neighbourhoods are useful, but they're worse than political boundaries in terms of being unsurveyable. It really depends on the situation, when there are hard limits (railway tracks, waterways, motorways, cliffs, forests, ) the situation will be much clearer in respect to more fluid boundaries, but still having some rough info about the extension is much better than having a single point which doesn't tell you at all if this neighbourhood is 1 or 8 miles in diameter. When you evaluate this info you could still take care how close to other neighborhoods and how close to the border of the neighbourhood polygon a feature is. Cheers, Martin And while the boundaries may not be exact, people can always change them! OSM's model is about improving surveyed information, but does not handle subjective data well. If you think that a boundary is on one place, and I think it is another, the fact is that we both may be right. OSM doesn't handle this concept. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: Your reply really doesn't address what William is saying, which is that neighbourhood boundaries are subjective. I think we all agree that neighbourhoods are useful, but they're worse than political boundaries in terms of being unsurveyable. I agree that most neighborhood boundaries are subjective. Of the cities I've lived in, some neighborhoods are clearly define, usually by natural or man made artifacts, others are definitely fluid. When importing addresses into Seattle we considered adding a neighborhood tag to each address or building node but decided against it. Administrative boundaries seemed like a better plan. After this discussion I'm not longer so certain. So what are the pro and cons for importing boundaries? Cons: Neighborhood boundaries are fluid Most neighborhood boundaries can not be surveyed 3rd party data users and overlay their own boundary polygons Pros: Helpful when doing queries Search results show neighborhood boundaries Irregularly shaped neighborhoods better depicted by a polygon than a node Personally I don't have any objection if someone wanted to import neighborhood boundaries for their city. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I agree with the advantage of polygons when performing queries of the type 'show me all bakeries in this neighborhood'. This will however only work if that neighborhood is clearly defined in terms of boundaries. If we agree that this is not the case, we are just going to be creating confusion and perhaps even edit wars when we settle on polygons for neighborhoods. A node location for a neighborhood is something locals should be able to relatively easily agree on. I think we can see much faster progress proceeding along that avenue. I think that we should show great restraint with importing any more boundary polygons. They make mapping more difficult and confusing, for example because they often overlap with roads. They do not represent surveyable / verifiable data in many cases, which makes for dead data, which we have enough of in the US. Back to my original question, rephrased slightly - would there be a legal impediment to use Zillow or Geonames data to derive neighborhood point data to increase coverage in OSM? Why I care - because neighborhood data represents just what makes OSM unique - local knowledge. Why use external sources then you say? Well, the point would be to make it easy for locals to add neighborhood data to OSM, by offering a data starting point. Martijn On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.comwrote: Your reply really doesn't address what William is saying, which is that neighbourhood boundaries are subjective. I think we all agree that neighbourhoods are useful, but they're worse than political boundaries in terms of being unsurveyable. I agree that most neighborhood boundaries are subjective. Of the cities I've lived in, some neighborhoods are clearly define, usually by natural or man made artifacts, others are definitely fluid. When importing addresses into Seattle we considered adding a neighborhood tag to each address or building node but decided against it. Administrative boundaries seemed like a better plan. After this discussion I'm not longer so certain. So what are the pro and cons for importing boundaries? Cons: Neighborhood boundaries are fluid Most neighborhood boundaries can not be surveyed 3rd party data users and overlay their own boundary polygons Pros: Helpful when doing queries Search results show neighborhood boundaries Irregularly shaped neighborhoods better depicted by a polygon than a node Personally I don't have any objection if someone wanted to import neighborhood boundaries for their city. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Interesting discussion, I've been working at thinking how to approach doing this in my hometown of Tempe, AZ http://www.tempe.gov/index.aspx?page=792 They classify neighborhoods two ways, homeowners associations (the classic HOA) and neighborhood associations. The former is usually set up by the developer and the latter is more organic, either historically significant or like minded individuals band together to improve the community. Now I think I could import these boundaries without worry because they are city defined but I've been struggling with how it would impact the database. After reading this discussion I'm going to move forward and import them. -- James Fee 480-225-2287 @cageyjames On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.comwrote: Your reply really doesn't address what William is saying, which is that neighbourhood boundaries are subjective. I think we all agree that neighbourhoods are useful, but they're worse than political boundaries in terms of being unsurveyable. I agree that most neighborhood boundaries are subjective. Of the cities I've lived in, some neighborhoods are clearly define, usually by natural or man made artifacts, others are definitely fluid. When importing addresses into Seattle we considered adding a neighborhood tag to each address or building node but decided against it. Administrative boundaries seemed like a better plan. After this discussion I'm not longer so certain. So what are the pro and cons for importing boundaries? Cons: Neighborhood boundaries are fluid Most neighborhood boundaries can not be surveyed 3rd party data users and overlay their own boundary polygons Pros: Helpful when doing queries Search results show neighborhood boundaries Irregularly shaped neighborhoods better depicted by a polygon than a node Personally I don't have any objection if someone wanted to import neighborhood boundaries for their city. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? Using Zillow wouldn't be an improvement. Where I live, Zillow has the same incorrect information as the TIGER CDP (which I removed from OSM). I'd bet Geonames has equally inaccurate information. If you want large quantities of terrible neighbourhood information, just import the latest TIGER CDPs. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Martijn writes: I agree with the advantage of polygons when performing queries of the type 'show me all bakeries in this neighborhood'. This will however only work if that neighborhood is clearly defined in terms of boundaries. If we agree that this is not the case, we are just going to be creating confusion and perhaps even edit wars when we settle on polygons for neighborhoods. A node location for a neighborhood is something locals should be able to relatively easily agree on. I think we can see much faster progress proceeding along that avenue. I'll say it again: both polygons and nodes are useful as neighborhoods in the map. We shouldn't outright dissuade either one, as each type of data has value and is valid. However, we should be careful at encouraging non-locals from entering neighborhood data (of either type) as (IMHO) it truly is best for a local (person) to enter these. At a minimum, a non-local entering neighborhood data should vet the data with a local, or do some research to verify its accuracy, as difficult as either or both may be. I think that we should show great restraint with importing any more boundary polygons. They make mapping more difficult and confusing, for example because they often overlap with roads. They do not represent surveyable / verifiable data in many cases, which makes for dead data, which we have enough of in the US. Well, SOME polygons correspond, for example, to a sign on a road once the boundary is crossed saying Welcome to (Neighborhood). That is surveyable, but I agree, it is not widespread. Also, we have not well discussed those places where a street or small area realistically shares membership in two adjoining neighborhoods. Is Jane Street (NYC) in Chelsea or Greenwich Village? Well, kind of both. This is where nodes work better. And again, neighborhood nodes belong not in some mathematically-determined center but rather at a cultural crossroads that represents the heart of the center of that neighborhood. Back to my original question, rephrased slightly - would there be a legal impediment to use Zillow or Geonames data to derive neighborhood point data to increase coverage in OSM? Very incumbent upon any import is an honest brokerage to verify the data are fresh and accurate. This is true of not just neighborhood imports, but any import. Checking the legality/license-ability is one (important) thing. Checking its freshness and accuracy is another, and just as important. Why I care - because neighborhood data represents just what makes OSM unique - local knowledge. Why use external sources then you say? Well, the point would be to make it easy for locals to add neighborhood data to OSM, by offering a data starting point. A worthy goal, to be sure. But imagine a new user coming to an early map with both noisy TIGER data and noisy neighborhood data: possibly misnamed and mislocated centroid neighborhood nodes, and little else. Does that make for a good place for that user to jump-start mapping? I think not. Let's be careful at importing non-local neighborhood data. I'm OK with it being nodes or polygons, I'm OK with importing it, but it really should be accurate and verified data. ESPECIALLY with neighborhoods, getting a local person who knows the geography is an exceedingly helpful (maybe even required?) component of this sort of data entry. In short: if an automated (import or import-like) process, like Map-A-Thon, were to bring into the map either neighborhood polygons or neighborhood nodes, I'm OK with that, so long as somebody local gets to verify the data and say yup, that's where I'd put that, because I know that's where that neighborhood is. Otherwise, it could very well be the TIGER import all over again. This makes such a process a bit more difficult, but it has the upside potential of better developing local OSM community, by reaching out to those who know an area well. Certainly, we can do exactly this, but let's do it right. (Martijn, thank you for encouraging us to reach high like this: it's a worthy goal, it's doable, and it challenges us in a rewarding way). SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
2013/6/12 stevea stevea...@softworkers.com Is Jane Street (NYC) in Chelsea or Greenwich Village? Well, kind of both. This is where nodes work better. well, they could also overlap (so you could see from the polygons that there is a certain area which somehow belongs to both neighbourhoods (and probably to none of them clearly, as it is distant from both centers). And again, neighborhood nodes belong not in some mathematically-determined center but rather at a cultural crossroads that represents the heart of the center of that neighborhood. +1, I agree that if you have no idea where the actual boundary might be (perceived by the locals) it is best to put a node to where you are sure it is a central place for this neighbourhood. cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: I agree that most neighborhood boundaries are subjective. Of the cities I've lived in, some neighborhoods are clearly define, usually by natural or man made artifacts, others are definitely fluid. When importing addresses into Seattle we considered adding a neighborhood tag to each address or building node but decided against it. Administrative boundaries seemed like a better plan. After this discussion I'm not longer so certain. So what are the pro and cons for importing boundaries? Cons: Neighborhood boundaries are fluid Most neighborhood boundaries can not be surveyed 3rd party data users and overlay their own boundary polygons Pros: Helpful when doing queries Search results show neighborhood boundaries Irregularly shaped neighborhoods better depicted by a polygon than a node Personally I don't have any objection if someone wanted to import neighborhood boundaries for their city. There are really two questions here, which have different answers: 1. Are neighborhoods useful? 2. Are neighborhoods good to put in OSM? The answer to #1 is Yes, neighborhood data is useful. The answer to #2 is No, for the reasons outlined. But that's okay, because we have other datasets available to us, like TIGER, or Quattroshapes or the Flickr neighborhood dataset (should it ever be made available), or even something like OpenGeocoder. This data can then be fed into a renderer, or geocoder to create the useful output. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: The answer to #1 is Yes, neighborhood data is useful. The answer to #2 is No, for the reasons outlined. These are *your* answer these questions. I disagree with your conclusion on #2, for reasons outlined. -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I support this. Go to Google Maps and search for SoMa, South Beach, and Rincon Hill. The office I am sitting in right now is in all of those polygons. Some cities formally define their neighborhoods, and OSM could use that data. Some neighborhoods are more informal, and those may make sense as nodes rather than polygons. On Jun 12, 2013 11:30 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/6/12 stevea stevea...@softworkers.com Is Jane Street (NYC) in Chelsea or Greenwich Village? Well, kind of both. This is where nodes work better. well, they could also overlap (so you could see from the polygons that there is a certain area which somehow belongs to both neighbourhoods (and probably to none of them clearly, as it is distant from both centers). And again, neighborhood nodes belong not in some mathematically-determined center but rather at a cultural crossroads that represents the heart of the center of that neighborhood. +1, I agree that if you have no idea where the actual boundary might be (perceived by the locals) it is best to put a node to where you are sure it is a central place for this neighbourhood. cheers, Martin ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: These are *your* answer these questions. I disagree with your conclusion on #2, for reasons outlined. Let's not get personal here... I don't see how any of the discussions here have addressed some basic questions, so please explain it to me. Specifically: 1. How can someone survey a neighborhood? It seems that in many cases, neighborhoods are subjective, and people may disagree on where it is, and both be right. How does your proposal address this issue? 2. If I understand your proposal correctly, you are saying that your solution is that nodes, rather than polygons, offer a concept of fuzzyness, that solves some of the subjectiveness issues. But if you know the data is fuzzy then isn't it also, by definition, then a bit wrong as well, since we can't make radius assumptions about neighborhoods, and our scale of neighborhood changes so much depending on where we're talking about? 3. We already have issues with neighborhoods messing up the geocoding problems in OSM. If we have lots of new users who are adding nodes, won't this just get worse? 4. Why not agree to use another service for this data other than OSM? Or conversely, why not use an existing dataset other than OSM, which already contains neighborhoods, such as the Flickr dataset? - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: 1. How can someone survey a neighborhood? It seems that in many cases, neighborhoods are subjective, and people may disagree on where it is, and both be right. How does your proposal address this issue? It's the same as named place nodes. It's something that is important as a geographical reference point, yet not strictly defined, but locals can easily agree on where it should be. 2. If I understand your proposal correctly, you are saying that your solution is that nodes, rather than polygons, offer a concept of fuzzyness, that solves some of the subjectiveness issues. But if you know the data is fuzzy then isn't it also, by definition, then a bit wrong as well, since we can't make radius assumptions about neighborhoods, and our scale of neighborhood changes so much depending on where we're talking about? I'm not proposing a solution, I'm just contributing to the discussion with the hopes of reaching a consensus on how to do this, if at all. The answer to your question is no, the data would not be 'wrong', because it's what local mappers agree on. 3. We already have issues with neighborhoods messing up the geocoding problems in OSM. If we have lots of new users who are adding nodes, won't this just get worse? I don't know of those issues so I can't really answer that. 4. Why not agree to use another service for this data other than OSM? Or conversely, why not use an existing dataset other than OSM, which already contains neighborhoods, such as the Flickr dataset As far as I am concerned, that could be an option, but the fact is that there is a place=neighbourhood tag and people are going to use it, and other people are going to look at the data and go: meh OSM has poor neighborhood coverage, let's do something about that - and then we'll have this discussion again. -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: These are *your* answer these questions. I disagree with your conclusion on #2, for reasons outlined. Let's not get personal here... (Please don't force me to read every single post in this mailing list. I have a puppy that needs most of my attention -- it shouldn't all go to moderating the mailing list :) ) 4. Why not agree to use another service for this data other than OSM? Or conversely, why not use an existing dataset other than OSM, which already contains neighborhoods, such as the Flickr dataset? Yes please! It's my opinion that OSM is not the place for subjective stuff like borders and admin_areas, especially neighborhood boundaries. David Blackman and Nathaniel Kelso et al. have worked tirelessly on building tools to make border polygons and tools around them. Let's use those tools for this sort of stuff and use the resulting shapes when rendering OSM data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Hiya, OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. Martijn -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On 6/11/2013 2:58 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. The TIGER import brought in many subdivisions as Hamlets, so the some information is there but is not necessarily the best form. I'm not clear myself on how to tag the classic US subdivision and apartment complex. I try to change these to areas when possible so that Nominatim-style searches doesn't identify nearby POIs outside the boundary as belonging to the nearest neighborhood. Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Note that, if not all of the subdivision has been developed as yet, the residents may not be entirely sure where the undeveloped subdivision land ends and other, adjoining, undeveloped land begins, so you might need to check with the company that is developing the subdivision. Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
That's basically what I am proposing. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I think this is a problem more people have. In the GNIS import for populated places, a lot of apartment buildings and trailer parks are grouped together with 'real' populated places while they are really separate things for all intents and purposes. But that may also have a lot to do with lack of resolution of GNIS. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: On 6/11/2013 2:58 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. The TIGER import brought in many subdivisions as Hamlets, so the some information is there but is not necessarily the best form. I'm not clear myself on how to tag the classic US subdivision and apartment complex. I try to change these to areas when possible so that Nominatim-style searches doesn't identify nearby POIs outside the boundary as belonging to the nearest neighborhood. Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. __**_ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I think this is a good idea but have some suggested considerations. If I remember correctly, MapRoulette 2 has the ability to localize the challenge, correct? If/when is that available I think that would be a great challenge, just a simple “verify this is the proper neighborhood name and appropriate value”. However, I have not seen a real good reference for correlating the place values in the US (although I haven’t looked); does someone know of one? or maybe a good first step is to try and create one. Also I don’t think this will get us anywhere near complete as we get into rural areas we don’t know and that don’t have local mappers (and those using MR), so we may need to further do some sort of ‘challenge’ (that may not work with MR) to ‘import’/cross-reference another data set. =Russ russdeffner on OSM From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:58 PM To: OSM US Talk Subject: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow Hiya, OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. Martijn -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
My house is technically in a subdivision named Murray Heights, but I have only seen that name on the deed, and on maps. In the 21 years I have lived here, I have never heard anyone use that name. The subdivision was built in the late 1950s, and, unlike some other local subdivisions, there aren't any permanent signs in place as you enter the subdivision. According to the post office, my house is in the Woodbine postal district, named after a small town that was subsequently swallowed up by the expansion of Nashville. However, when people refer to the Woodbine area, they usually mean the approximate area of the old town, several miles from my house. I usually refer to my neighborhood as Antioch, the name of another small town that has expanded outward, even though the official border of Antioch, according to the post office, is about 300 feet from my house. Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? Sometimes subdivisions map cleanly to neighborhoods. But not always. In the USA aspirational neighborhoods are common, if not the rule. As a neighborhood gets trendy more and more people at the edges (and more and more Realtors) latch on to that name. The Zillow data is a very rigid idea of what a neighborhood is. Walk three blocks away from Noe Valley and ask what neighborhood you are in, and you're likely to get four answers. Capturing that diversity would produce a far more useful neighborhood guide than just importing Zillow. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Russ -- Yes, MR2 will have the ability to work on a specific location (likely to be specified as a point + radius, or bbox). What do you mean by correlating place values, correlating with what? Rural areas are not as important for neighborhood coverage I would say. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Russell Deffner russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.com wrote: I think this is a good idea but have some suggested considerations. ** ** If I remember correctly, MapRoulette 2 has the ability to localize the challenge, correct? If/when is that available I think that would be a great challenge, just a simple “verify this is the proper neighborhood name and appropriate value”. However, I have not seen a real good reference for correlating the place values in the US (although I haven’t looked); does someone know of one? or maybe a good first step is to try and create one. Also I don’t think this will get us anywhere near complete as we get into rural areas we don’t know and that don’t have local mappers (and those using MR), so we may need to further do some sort of ‘challenge’ (that may not work with MR) to ‘import’/cross-reference another data set. ** ** =Russ russdeffner on OSM ** ** *From:* Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org] *Sent:* Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:58 PM *To:* OSM US Talk *Subject:* [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow ** ** Hiya, ** ** OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. ** ** Martijn -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ** ** -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Yea, I think this is where sources like Geonames and Zillow, which are built (to an extent) based on actual perceived names rather than official ones, could be so valuable - and why GNIS populated places are detrimental to OSM map quality, at least in many urban areas. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:55 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote: My house is technically in a subdivision named Murray Heights, but I have only seen that name on the deed, and on maps. In the 21 years I have lived here, I have never heard anyone use that name. The subdivision was built in the late 1950s, and, unlike some other local subdivisions, there aren't any permanent signs in place as you enter the subdivision. According to the post office, my house is in the Woodbine postal district, named after a small town that was subsequently swallowed up by the expansion of Nashville. However, when people refer to the Woodbine area, they usually mean the approximate area of the old town, several miles from my house. I usually refer to my neighborhood as Antioch, the name of another small town that has expanded outward, even though the official border of Antioch, according to the post office, is about 300 feet from my house. Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? Sometimes subdivisions map cleanly to neighborhoods. But not always. In the USA aspirational neighborhoods are common, if not the rule. As a neighborhood gets trendy more and more people at the edges (and more and more Realtors) latch on to that name. The Zillow data is a very rigid idea of what a neighborhood is. Walk three blocks away from Noe Valley and ask what neighborhood you are in, and you're likely to get four answers. Capturing that diversity would produce a far more useful neighborhood guide than just importing Zillow. -- Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I mean deciding what place value to use, i.e. is this a hamlet, neighborhood, etc. So I guess more of a guideline for tagging places in the US is what I’d like to have for a MR challenge. As far as rural, in my rural CO area very few of what I’d call ‘neighborhoods’ exist in OSM; I’ve added the ones I know right around me and that was about 1/2 dozen. I would guess that these could make up for a relatively significant number across the entire US. From: mve...@gmail.com [mailto:mve...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martijn van Exel Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:56 PM To: Russell Deffner Cc: OSM US Talk Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow Russ -- Yes, MR2 will have the ability to work on a specific location (likely to be specified as a point + radius, or bbox). What do you mean by correlating place values, correlating with what? Rural areas are not as important for neighborhood coverage I would say. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Russell Deffner russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.commailto:russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.com wrote: I think this is a good idea but have some suggested considerations. If I remember correctly, MapRoulette 2 has the ability to localize the challenge, correct? If/when is that available I think that would be a great challenge, just a simple “verify this is the proper neighborhood name and appropriate value”. However, I have not seen a real good reference for correlating the place values in the US (although I haven’t looked); does someone know of one? or maybe a good first step is to try and create one. Also I don’t think this will get us anywhere near complete as we get into rural areas we don’t know and that don’t have local mappers (and those using MR), so we may need to further do some sort of ‘challenge’ (that may not work with MR) to ‘import’/cross-reference another data set. =Russ russdeffner on OSM From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.orgmailto:m...@rtijn.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:58 PM To: OSM US Talk Subject: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow Hiya, OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. Martijn -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
As for Bryce's observation - Zillow does not have overlapping polygons as far as I know, so it is by its nature sort of rigid - but then again this is probably what they require for their use case, as there would be no way to disambiguate. Interesting in this context is the much-quoted example of flickr alpha shapes [1] where flickr tags are used to create (overlapping) polygons of vernacular place names. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Yea, I think this is where sources like Geonames and Zillow, which are built (to an extent) based on actual perceived names rather than official ones, could be so valuable - and why GNIS populated places are detrimental to OSM map quality, at least in many urban areas. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:55 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote: My house is technically in a subdivision named Murray Heights, but I have only seen that name on the deed, and on maps. In the 21 years I have lived here, I have never heard anyone use that name. The subdivision was built in the late 1950s, and, unlike some other local subdivisions, there aren't any permanent signs in place as you enter the subdivision. According to the post office, my house is in the Woodbine postal district, named after a small town that was subsequently swallowed up by the expansion of Nashville. However, when people refer to the Woodbine area, they usually mean the approximate area of the old town, several miles from my house. I usually refer to my neighborhood as Antioch, the name of another small town that has expanded outward, even though the official border of Antioch, according to the post office, is about 300 feet from my house. Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? Sometimes subdivisions map cleanly to neighborhoods. But not always. In the USA aspirational neighborhoods are common, if not the rule. As a neighborhood gets trendy more and more people at the edges (and more and more Realtors) latch on to that name. The Zillow data is a very rigid idea of what a neighborhood is. Walk three blocks away from Noe Valley and ask what neighborhood you are in, and you're likely to get four answers. Capturing that diversity would produce a far more useful neighborhood guide than just importing Zillow. -- Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: As for Bryce's observation - Zillow does not have overlapping polygons as far as I know, so it is by its nature sort of rigid - but then again this is probably what they require for their use case, as there would be no way to disambiguate. That said, neighborhoods are known to be fuzzy concepts, and getting a person close to the right one has value. The zillow data for example could be brought in as point features. While it seems a shame, it would remove that whole issue of boundaries. Often (not always, but often) the neighborhood does in fact have a well defined central core. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I think point features are definitely the way to go here - areas are nice but have the drawback of being to rigid a delineation, as well as being more difficult to map and maintain. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: As for Bryce's observation - Zillow does not have overlapping polygons as far as I know, so it is by its nature sort of rigid - but then again this is probably what they require for their use case, as there would be no way to disambiguate. That said, neighborhoods are known to be fuzzy concepts, and getting a person close to the right one has value. The zillow data for example could be brought in as point features. While it seems a shame, it would remove that whole issue of boundaries. Often (not always, but often) the neighborhood does in fact have a well defined central core. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I'm interested in this, I recently posted a question on how to map subdivisions, I'm using landuse=residential,name=Name of Subdivision to map mine. I think it's important that for US purposes, we can distinguish between HOA managed subdivisions, which are defined as a legal entity, and all other types of indicators (hamlet, neighborhood etc). My city, (Centennial, Colorado) which is quite new, has no areas that are 'neighbourhoods', all residential areas are either subdivisions or are are defined as just a city address (for those that have no HOA. There is no naming 'creep' as someone raised in this thread. Mark From: Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org To: Russell Deffner russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.com Cc: OSM US Talk talk-us@openstreetmap.org Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow Russ -- Yes, MR2 will have the ability to work on a specific location (likely to be specified as a point + radius, or bbox). What do you mean by correlating place values, correlating with what? Rural areas are not as important for neighborhood coverage I would say. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Russell Deffner russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.com wrote: I think this is a good idea but have some suggested considerations. If I remember correctly, MapRoulette 2 has the ability to localize the challenge, correct? If/when is that available I think that would be a great challenge, just a simple “verify this is the proper neighborhood name and appropriate value”. However, I have not seen a real good reference for correlating the place values in the US (although I haven’t looked); does someone know of one? or maybe a good first step is to try and create one. Also I don’t think this will get us anywhere near complete as we get into rural areas we don’t know and that don’t have local mappers (and those using MR), so we may need to further do some sort of ‘challenge’ (that may not work with MR) to ‘import’/cross-reference another data set. =Russ russdeffner on OSM From:Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:58 PM To: OSM US Talk Subject: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow Hiya, OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. Martijn -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ -- Martijn van Exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com/ http://openstreetmap.us/ ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I'm also in favor of using points for neighborhoods. Exact boundaries are extremely subjective in some places. In places where they actually are well-defined perhaps they are also different conceptually? For example, in NYC we have fuzzy neighborhoods, of course, but we also have community board boundaries which sometimes follow similar boundaries to neighborhoods and can stand in for neighborhoods. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: As for Bryce's observation - Zillow does not have overlapping polygons as far as I know, so it is by its nature sort of rigid - but then again this is probably what they require for their use case, as there would be no way to disambiguate. That said, neighborhoods are known to be fuzzy concepts, and getting a person close to the right one has value. The zillow data for example could be brought in as point features. While it seems a shame, it would remove that whole issue of boundaries. Often (not always, but often) the neighborhood does in fact have a well defined central core. ___ 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] Neighborhoods / Zillow
OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. Martijn I don't use points (a POI with place=* or neighbourhood=* tag) but rather named polygons which surround/define a given named residential area. These seem to work just as well: What I've done in my city is to get the (public domain) digital city data for how parcels are grouped together into polygons defining residential neighborhoods, with names in the name=* tag (and even numbers for each residential neighborhood, which I've put into the ref=* tag). These get an additional landuse=residential tag, and voilá, OSM (the database), mapnik and Nominatim all capture/display/index each neighborhood properly (Nominatim nicely and correctly as Residential area.) The same data sets also contain outer-parcel-edge boundaries for commercial and industrial districts, which of course get landuse=commercial and landuse=industrial tags (respectively), as well as THEIR name=* (and ref=*) tags. As a result, our city displays very nicely, all neighborhoods/districts show up in Nominatim, and the OSM database contains definitive, correct polygons, straight from a public domain source (the city GIS department). There are a very small number (two, three?) of additional data points which my neighbors use as community names (like East Park or Midtown) which the city doesn't actually define, but people who live and/or work there do. For these, I use place=locality, name=* tags, and they render with a slightly different font (and smaller type size) than the neighborhoods/districts above. For these, I place the point at a significant cultural centroid for those small sub-communities (place=suburb is too big, though I have also defined four of those in my city of 60,000 -- suburb points also display with distinct/different typeface/size, and at certain zoom levels which make it clear they are suburbs). From both an in the OSM DB and a how does mapnik display this (in addition to how Nominatim indexes), I believe this is completely correct, and they look nice, too. I sincerely believe anybody who lives in these neighborhoods would agree. I would guess many medium- and larger-sized cities have these sorts of datasets available: they are just big polygons that surround a neighborhood or commercial/industrial district: no single point required. While these might take up more space in OSM's database, the extra points for the polygon-defining way makes them quite exact, and mapnik's rendering is in the very center of each polygon: a nice way to do it. I invite you to take a look (within the City limits): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37lon=-122zoom=14layers=M I don't think Zillow or Geonames should be leaned on too heavily (if at all) to define these: where neighborhoods begin and end is very much a local thing, and usually the City itself (or the County for unincorporated areas) or people who live locally are best at defining these. That's why I'd say MapRoulette is a poor candidate for doing this: you won't get local knowledge, you're just crowd-sourcing what effectively becomes an import among many, and they don't really know whether the data are high quality or not. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
But how would such a thing be tagged? For instance, here in Portland, we have defined neighborhoods, which have neighborhood associations, and a city bureau (the Office of Neighborhood Involvement) dedicated to working with those organizations. They are, in a very real, if not technically legal sense, administrative units of the City. There is often good correlation between perceived/colloquial neighborhood, and the boundaries defined by the ONI, but not always. So is there a need to distinguish in tags perceived neighborhoods and administrative defined ones? And, if we insist on being able to ground truth something, do perceived neighborhoods even belong anywhere in OSM? (For the record, I think the ground truth requirement to be quite often untenable…) d. On Jun 11, 2013, at 12:57, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Yea, I think this is where sources like Geonames and Zillow, which are built (to an extent) based on actual perceived names rather than official ones, could be so valuable - and why GNIS populated places are detrimental to OSM map quality, at least in many urban areas. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Nathaniel Kelso David Blackman's presentation at #sotmus on Quattroshapes might offer some guidance, at least with respect to a method. They used Foursquare checkins and geotagged Flickr photos to calculate some boundaries. Now, I am more likely to check in at Arlington (my city) than I am in East Falls Church (my neighborhood), but perhaps we could organize a project around a similar method? -- SEJ -- twitter: @geomantic -- skype: sejohnson8 There are two types of people in the world. Those that can extrapolate from incomplete data. On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 4:30 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. Martijn I don't use points (a POI with place=* or neighbourhood=* tag) but rather named polygons which surround/define a given named residential area. These seem to work just as well: What I've done in my city is to get the (public domain) digital city data for how parcels are grouped together into polygons defining residential neighborhoods, with names in the name=* tag (and even numbers for each residential neighborhood, which I've put into the ref=* tag). These get an additional landuse=residential tag, and voilá, OSM (the database), mapnik and Nominatim all capture/display/index each neighborhood properly (Nominatim nicely and correctly as Residential area.) The same data sets also contain outer-parcel-edge boundaries for commercial and industrial districts, which of course get landuse=commercial and landuse=industrial tags (respectively), as well as THEIR name=* (and ref=*) tags. As a result, our city displays very nicely, all neighborhoods/districts show up in Nominatim, and the OSM database contains definitive, correct polygons, straight from a public domain source (the city GIS department). There are a very small number (two, three?) of additional data points which my neighbors use as community names (like East Park or Midtown) which the city doesn't actually define, but people who live and/or work there do. For these, I use place=locality, name=* tags, and they render with a slightly different font (and smaller type size) than the neighborhoods/districts above. For these, I place the point at a significant cultural centroid for those small sub-communities (place=suburb is too big, though I have also defined four of those in my city of 60,000 -- suburb points also display with distinct/different typeface/size, and at certain zoom levels which make it clear they are suburbs). From both an in the OSM DB and a how does mapnik display this (in addition to how Nominatim indexes), I believe this is completely correct, and they look nice, too. I sincerely believe anybody who lives in these neighborhoods would agree. I would guess many medium- and larger-sized cities have these sorts of datasets available: they are just big polygons that surround a neighborhood or commercial/industrial district: no single point required. While these might take up more space in OSM's database, the extra points for the polygon-defining way makes them quite exact, and mapnik's rendering is in the very center of each polygon: a nice way to do it. I invite you to take a look (within the City limits): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=37lon=-122zoom=14**layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37lon=-122zoom=14layers=M I don't think Zillow or Geonames should be leaned on too heavily (if at all) to define these: where neighborhoods begin and end is very much a local thing, and usually the City itself (or the County for unincorporated areas) or people who live locally are best at defining these. That's why I'd say MapRoulette is a poor candidate for doing this: you won't get local knowledge, you're just crowd-sourcing what effectively becomes an import among many, and they don't really know whether the data are high quality or not. SteveA California __**_ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. We have city outlines of neighborhoods and sub neighborhoods. A couple of us have discussed adding them to Seattle but didn't know if neighborhood boundaries were acceptable. They can not be surveyed on the ground and they do change over time. Any thoughts? I wouldn't add a sub neighborhood since most people have never heard of the name! As far as MapRoulette, in Seattle we already have most gnis nodes somewhere near the center of the neighborhood. How do you see MapRoulette handling existing entries? One last thought. nextdoor.com is attempting to build on the concept of neighborhoods. I wonder if we could partner with them to get more help identifying their neighborhoods. Similar to Steve Coast's app that asked people to pick the front door of a house. Imagine if we had a bunch of people point to and name what they considered was their neighborhood. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
One last thought. nextdoor.com is attempting to build on the concept of neighborhoods. I wonder if we could partner with them to get more help identifying their neighborhoods. Similar to Steve Coast's app that asked people to pick the front door of a house. Imagine if we had a bunch of people point to and name what they considered was their neighborhood. You'd end up with this: http://bostonography.com/images/misc/neighborhoods_labeled.jpg Discussed here: http://bostonography.com/2012/wanted-your-map-of-boston-neighborhoods/ d. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Darrell Fuhriman darr...@garnix.orgwrote: You'd end up with this: http://bostonography.com/images/misc/neighborhoods_labeled.jpg Discussed here: http://bostonography.com/2012/wanted-your-map-of-boston-neighborhoods/ True. I suppose part of it is wanting to be associated with a more desirable neighborhood. One of the advantages of just using a neighborhood node is not having to have fixed boundaries. If we got survey results back we could then average the results to find a center point for the node. Fuzzy logic anyone? -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Martin, In many Los Angeles neighborhoods, asking residents is not feasible. Most are in cars, not walking. Some people wouldn't talk to you, and many wouldn't know, given the transient nature of some neighborhoods. On the other hand, the City of Los Angeles has been identifying a number of neighborhoods and gracing them with signs on main roads. For Los Angeles, at least, city government would be a good source. I believe there is a trend in many other large cities to identify neighborhoods. Charlotte At 12:21 PM 6/11/2013, you wrote: On 11/giu/2013, at 21:07, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Often, I can't determine the subdivision boundary from either Bing or a survey; I'd need to see an organization map which would be of questionable license. or ask the people that live there, would that be feasible? cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us Charlotte Wolter 927 18th Street Suite A Santa Monica, California 90403 +1-310-597-4040 techl...@techlady.com Skype: thetechlady The Four Internet Freedoms Freedom to visit any site on the Internet Freedom to access any content or service that is not illegal Freedom to attach any device that does not interfere with the network Freedom to know all the terms of a service, particularly any that would affect the first three freedoms. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Hiya, I am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or something along those lines. I think neighborhoods are not something that really fits the OSM model well. OSM is great for visable (ie surveyable) features, but does a historically poor job at features which are not ground surveyable, I think it's better for us to use these services for rendering and geocoding, and not putting this data in OSM. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Darrell Fuhriman darr...@garnix.orgwrote: But how would such a thing be tagged? By boundary, what's the next level below city? For instance, here in Portland, we have defined neighborhoods, which have neighborhood associations, and a city bureau (the Office of Neighborhood Involvement) dedicated to working with those organizations. They are, in a very real, if not technically legal sense, administrative units of the City. Portland calls them districts, with the exception of the Rose Quarter, but there's no distinction between district and quarter in the Portland sense, and they do have defined boundaries. Pretty sure ONI would be happy to point you in the right direction. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
I'm really intrigued by this conversation. Neighborhood identity is subjective - collectively defined by residents and stakeholders (businesses, and other organizations) within and outside of the neighborhood as well as governments, politicians, and the media. Nonetheless, I believe they belong in OpenStreetmap because they are an important part of capturing what may not physically be on the ground but the name is represented in discussion and the neighborhood may have characteristics unique to its bordering neighborhoods (housing types, types of businesses, socioeconomic status, local business types, and obviously, local geographic features - lakes, rivers, etc) Given the subjective, fluid nature of neighborhoods - especially boundaries - where one neighborhood ends and one begins - may change from person to person, they are best represented as a single node in the area where there is greatest consensus that the neighborhood is located. This can be very roughly estimated by OSM mappers who locally live in or near the area. stevea, Great work that you've done in your area with the neighborhood classification. I would just caution that deriving Neighborhood boundaries solely from the governments could be problematic because they don't represent the other stakeholders (mentioned earlier) and in the case of Cleveland, Ohio, neighborhood names designated by city planners are used mostly for planning purposes and have little influence on neighborhood identity reality on the ground. As darrell just mentioned, soliciting people to draw their neighborhoods has been done in Boston by Andy Woodward as well as Bill Morris in Burlington, Vt. As for tagging, as I understand, based on existing practice and previous discussions - lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-August/001437.html and lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2008-December/000594.html , neighborhoods within municipal limits, place=suburb is actually the most appropriate based on the tag's description in the wiki and d. place=neighbourhood was for smaller, distinct areas that would be considered to be within an existing neighborhood (place=suburb) but also be referred to by and additional name as well. An example of this in Cleveland would be Gordon Square within the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood. Regarding Zillow, I'd hesitate to import them but only because of my very limited experience of them (being Akron and Cleveland) where their neighborhood names were derived from local government data sets and in both cases were quite outdated and were representing the reality for most within Cleveland. Regards, Will ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:47 PM, william skora skorasau...@gmail.comwrote: Given the subjective, fluid nature of neighborhoods - especially boundaries - where one neighborhood ends and one begins - may change from person to person, they are best represented as a single node in the area where there is greatest consensus that the neighborhood is located. This can be very roughly estimated by OSM mappers who locally live in or near the area. One reason for including boundaries is querying to determine what exists in a neighborhood. Another is to see the result from a search using nominatim. A single node doesn't really tell much of a story, while a boundary give a better scope of the neighborhood. It might be more compelling for 3rd parties to use our information if we included the boundaries. They in turn give us greater visibility. And while the boundaries may not be exact, people can always change them! -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:38:29 -0500 From: Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org To: Darrell Fuhriman darr...@garnix.org Cc: Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org, OpenStreetMap Talk-US Mailing List talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow Message-ID: campm96rhaachymoedwq+bxnafvr5yhasykaenplag4cs0gk...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Darrell Fuhriman darr...@garnix.orgwrote: But how would such a thing be tagged? By boundary, what's the next level below city? For instance, here in Portland, we have defined neighborhoods, which have neighborhood associations, and a city bureau (the Office of Neighborhood Involvement) dedicated to working with those organizations. They are, in a very real, if not technically legal sense, administrative units of the City. Portland calls them districts, with the exception of the Rose Quarter, but there's no distinction between district and quarter in the Portland sense, and they do have defined boundaries. Pretty sure ONI would be happy to point you in the right direction. Many new neighborhoods are built by a single builder and are conveniently named, Arbor Heights for example, http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.55768lon=-122.81313zoom=17layers=M. Group several of these together to form an, um, neighborhood. -Dion___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow
stevea, Great work that you've done in your area with the neighborhood classification. I would just caution that deriving Neighborhood boundaries solely from the governments could be problematic because they don't represent the other stakeholders (mentioned earlier) and in the case of Cleveland, Ohio, neighborhood names designated by city planners are used mostly for planning purposes and have little influence on neighborhood identity reality on the ground. I totally agree, and thank you for the kudos. My little city (and the way that it looks in OSM) is (now) only a rough sketch. I am an early contributor. That's why I'm casting a wide net with seed examples of both city-government defined districts (which DO have community input: we have a vibrant and activist population who attend City Council meetings with a serious fervor) AND the more vague centroids of simple points that don't fit into a round hole as a the odd square peg named Terrace Hill or Midtown. (Alike. This needs broad brushes because there are broad strokes required to paint this canvas. Thankfully, OSM accommodates, even in both standard rendering and indexing). Communities ought to have multiple identities, such as the residential city-government consensus polygons I've mentioned, AND centroid points of vague here is something the locals call it around her alike. All are in the db, all render, and all are shown in indexes, rather appropriately. This is OK, if not pretty darn good. As darrell just mentioned, soliciting people to draw their neighborhoods has been done in Boston by Andy Woodward as well as Bill Morris in Burlington, Vt. As for tagging, as I understand, based on existing practice and previous discussions - http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-August/001437.htmllists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-August/001437.html and http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2008-December/000594.htmllists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2008-December/000594.html , neighborhoods within municipal limits, place=suburb is actually the most appropriate based on the tag's description in the wiki and d. place=neighbourhood was for smaller, distinct areas that would be considered to be within an existing neighborhood (place=suburb) but also be referred to by and additional name as well. An example of this in Cleveland would be Gordon Square within the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood. Workable, plastic, inventive and appropriate. Excellent! (IMHO). Regarding Zillow, I'd hesitate to import them but only because of my very limited experience of them (being Akron and Cleveland) where their neighborhood names were derived from local government data sets and in both cases were quite outdated and were representing the reality for most within Cleveland. Neighborhood definition across the rural/urban USA in a map like OSM (at least in these earlier years) is a fluid thing, it requires essentially constant input. When and where we find we are talking ourselves to death we can back off. Right now this is about weaving together strands that make a braid of consensus. So far, so good. I like the various approaches, I like the attaboys, I like the multiple input. Keep it up! We are building a better national community about how better to do this by this dialog (multi-log?) here. Capturing multiple semantics via slightly multiple syntax smears is OK. We [can, might] sharpen focus later. Three-hundred-million-plus at a time, I find it humbling to type like this. I am just a simple human being. SteveA California___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
