Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Janko Mihelić]

pon, 2. lis 2017. u 14:49 Ilya Zverev  napisao je:

> Exactly. OSM uses the reversed notation:
>
> ref:velobike is a ref for velobike, not velobike for ref.
> source:geometry is a source for geometry, not geometry for source.
>
> Wikipedia for brand should also be wikipedia:brand. This way all wikipedia
> links are grouped.
>
>
Your examples are the minority here. Most often before the colon is the
subject, and after the colon is its attribute. Just go to this link to see
most uses of the colon:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=%3A

addr:housenumber=3, house number is an attribute (or a part) of the whole
address
source:date=2017-07-07, date is an attribute of the source tag. It is not
the source of the date provided.
building:levels=4, number of levels is an attribute of the building
social_facility:for=seniors, who is the social facility for is an attribute
of the social facility
church:type=parish, type of the church is an attribute of the church

On the entire first page there are only two tags that use colons as you
said; ref*:*bag on place #10 and ref*:*ruian*:*building on place #34.

That's why, when I created the original Wikidata proposal, I suggested
brand:wikidata. Because Wikidata ID is an attribute of the brand.

Janko
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Ilya Zverev]

Exactly. OSM uses the reversed notation:

ref:velobike is a ref for velobike, not velobike for ref.
source:geometry is a source for geometry, not geometry for source.

Wikipedia for brand should also be wikipedia:brand. This way all wikipedia 
links are grouped.

Ilya

> Because it is wikipedia tag for brand, not brand for wikipedia. ("Wikipedia" 
> property of "brand") Like name:en is "English" property of "name", not "name" 
> property of "English". 02.10.2017 11:41, Ilya Zverev пишет: > Hi folks, 
> >
> > One question: why brand:wikipedia and not wikipedia:brand? 
> >
> > Should we now use brand:ref, en:name, maxspeed:source instead of the 
> > regular order? 
> >
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52002801
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52529386
> > etc.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Златовратский Павел]

Because it is wikipedia tag for brand, not brand for wikipedia. 
("Wikipedia" property of "brand")


Like name:en is "English" property of "name", not "name" property of 
"English".



02.10.2017 11:41, Ilya Zverev пишет:

Hi folks,

One question: why brand:wikipedia and not wikipedia:brand?

Should we now use brand:ref, en:name, maxspeed:source instead of the regular 
order?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52002801
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52529386
etc.

Ilya
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


--
С уважением, Златовратский Павел.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Ilya Zverev]

Hi folks,

One question: why brand:wikipedia and not wikipedia:brand?

Should we now use brand:ref, en:name, maxspeed:source instead of the regular 
order?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52002801
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52529386
etc.

Ilya
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-09-28 15:01 GMT+02:00 Andy Townsend :

> (in the case of the Aldis discussed elsewhere I suspect that there will
> always enough info to say which is which in other tags or using geographic
> location).
>


in the case of Aldi Nord and Aldi Süd, you'd have to know the precise
position of the "Aldi equator" in order to say which is which (e.g.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aldi_branches_in_Europe.svg ).
Other tags will hardly help you out. If you have the division it isn't a
very complicated case though, because this is about 2 brothers who divided
the world so that they would never compete with one another.

When there aren't clear borders / areas it is different.

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Townsend]

On 27/09/2017 17:14, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
* Problem #1:  In my analysis of OSM data, wikipedia tags quickly go 
stale because they use Wikipedia page titles, and titles are 
constantly renamed, deleted, and what's worse - old names are reused 
for new meanings.  This is a fundamental problem with all Wikipedia 
tags, such as wikipedia, brand:wikipedia, operator:wikipedia, etc, 
that needs solving. The solution does not need to be perfect, it just 
needs to be better than what we have.


* Problem #2: the *meaning* of the "wikipedia" tag is ambiguous, and 
therefor cannot be processed easily. The top three meanings I have 
seen are:
  a) This WP article is about this OSM feature (a so called 1:1 match, 
e.g. city, famous building, ...)
  b) This WP article is about some aspect of this OSM feature, like 
its brand, tree species, or subject of the sculpture
  c) Only a part of this WP article is about this OSM feature, e.g. a 
WP list of museums in the area contains description of this museum.


* Problem #3: data consumers need cleaner, more machine-processable 
data. The text label is much more error prone than an ID:  McDonalds 
vs mcdonalds vs McDonald's vs ..., so having "brand=mcdonalds" results 
in many errors. Note that just because OSM default map skin may handle 
some of them correctly, each data consumer has to re-implement that 
logic, so the more ambiguous something is, the more likely it will 
result in errors and data omissions.


The brand:wikidata discussion is about #1, #2b, and #3.

Are we in agreement that these are problems, or do you think none of 
them need solving?


1)  Not a problem as such.  If something has changed on the wikipedia 
side then something may need checking on the OSM side.  It might be as 
simple as "someone's just renamed the wikipedia page" then fine just fix 
the link - but it needs a human to check it. What might have happened of 
course is that the object has changed in the real world (been renamed, 
moved, or changed in some other way) and the object in OSM needs a 
resurvey, or perhaps can be changed based on existing knowledge, but 
either way it still needs checking.


2b) If someone's added a wikipedia link to an OSM object that represents 
a tree to point to the wikipedia page of that type of tree, than that's 
not helpful.  There's no need for the link, since the tree type is 
already tagged in OSM.


3) This depends on the data consumer.  If you're simply trying to 
impress people with the volume of data that you have access to then you 
might indeed want an a large number of unmaintainable extra links of 
dubious provenance.  Realistically though in my experience (as I've 
written elsewhere in this thread) data consumers do care about the 
quality of the data that they're processing, and the fact that the 
person adding the object spelt "McDonald's" differently is something 
that they may well have a view about.


In a different context I've written elsewhere about the work that went 
in to create the list at 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L1401 
which involved looking at how people tagged certain sorts of features in 
OSM.  Free tagging is both a strength and a weakness of OSM - without it 
the data wouldn't get captured at all, but with it people do have to 
look at the data that's been added - but it's what data consumers do 
already.  You could argue that a "brand:wikidata" key makes their job 
easier, but if they want to do a proper job it probably doesn't make a 
lot of difference.


Another example - I recently looked at the usage of "natural=fell" in 
OSM with a view to rendering it.  It surprised me that this query 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/s2q showed at least 3 different types of 
objects with the same OSM tag.  A data consumer can't assume that what 
they thought that something meant (perhaps after reading the OSM wiki) 
is what mappers actually do - they'll need to filter the data they're 
consuming based on actual OSM usage.  In the case of "brand:wikidata" 
they may want to filter out obviously bot-added values because there was 
no local knowledge of that data and go back to what other tags the 
mappers added (in the case of the Aldis discussed elsewhere I suspect 
that there will always enough info to say which is which in other tags 
or using geographic location).


Best Regards,

Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Dave F]

Unlikely, I'm sure, but you could have two brands with the same name on 
the same high street. Being antipodean doesn't define their differences.


DaveF.


On 27/09/2017 15:35, John F. Eldredge wrote:
The spatial information will tell you where each business location is; 
it is not sufficient to tell you whether these are multiple locations 
of the same brand, or two unrelated brands that share the same name 
and category of business.



On September 27, 2017 6:51:32 AM Richard Fairhurst 
 wrote:



Andy Mabbett wrote:

in different parts of the world


IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.

Richard



--
Sent from: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Lester Caine]

On 27/09/17 20:56, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> That formed no part of the early discussions on how wikidata should
> work? I bowed out when the discussions were going down a path I did not
> find to be at all useful. The current offering is certainly a lot more
> 'organised' than those original discussions.
> 
> Getting the initial points across is always a process. Hard to get it
> right from the start :)  I hope we can progress in a more organized and
> beneficial way.

I've been working with data involving addresses and other material for
over 25 years using relation databases, and I don't find many of the
'modern' approaches add anything to managing that data.

> I WOULD still like to see a
> storage model that allows third party lists to be managed and cross
> referenced, but that does not fit the wikidata model. It is why I think
> 
> 'another' cross-reference tool may be more appropriate with OSM and
> wikipedia/wikidata simply being sources.
> 
> I am not exactly sure what you mean here. What goals do you have in mind
> that cannot be stored with the current system?

I'm not sure that every third party source will want their data included
in either OSM or wikidata. I have a large volume of data that I can't
provide access to. I can currently access OSM via coordinates, but I
would like to tie every National Street Gazetteer entry to the matching
objects in OSM. wikidata should probably have an entry for every street
in the UK, but since the NSG data is not currently public domain using
this source is not CURRENTLY possible. Other data sources are linked
using NSG references so mapping those to OSM objects allows that data to
be used where it's licence does allow. Other countries have this same
mix of open data and private stuff which is nowadays a manageable
minefield from which the public domain content can be accessed.

> THAT requires OSM to have a
> 'unique id' one can use to cross reference though :(
> 
>  If a third party list has a list of OSM objects, any time a new object
> is added or existing one is changed, that 3rd party list needs to be
> updated.  Generally you don't want that. Also, it would require a
> substantial fundamental change to OSM data structure and social dynamics
> - the "ID" would have to be placed above all else, like it is done in
> Wikidata.  The ID meaning should never change, and merging two IDs
> should leave a redirect from one to the other.  I doubt that can be
> easily achievable. 

The whole point here is that any change should be easy to pick up. If a
new bus stop is added to that database, a bot monitoring this will pick
up the change and make the change available to other users. Similarly
when a record is updated, and changes that affect the monitoring bot's
target can be flagged. More and more sources are being made open access
and using suitable data to improve OSM's quality should be something
that is easy to manage.

YES the current OSM data structure has a problem when adding this layer
of management. A database like wikidata might be an option to provide
higher level lists of objects, which can then be linked to bot's which
manage primary data such as the NSG's update reports adding new streets
and changes to location hierarchy. But I should prefer that this layer
is part of OSM rather than a third party service.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Yuri Astrakhan]

>
> That formed no part of the early discussions on how wikidata should
> work? I bowed out when the discussions were going down a path I did not
> find to be at all useful. The current offering is certainly a lot more
> 'organised' than those original discussions.

Getting the initial points across is always a process. Hard to get it right
from the start :)  I hope we can progress in a more organized and
beneficial way.


> I WOULD still like to see a
> storage model that allows third party lists to be managed and cross
> referenced, but that does not fit the wikidata model. It is why I think

'another' cross-reference tool may be more appropriate with OSM and
> wikipedia/wikidata simply being sources.

I am not exactly sure what you mean here. What goals do you have in mind
that cannot be stored with the current system?


> THAT requires OSM to have a
> 'unique id' one can use to cross reference though :(

 If a third party list has a list of OSM objects, any time a new object is
added or existing one is changed, that 3rd party list needs to be updated.
Generally you don't want that. Also, it would require a substantial
fundamental change to OSM data structure and social dynamics - the "ID"
would have to be placed above all else, like it is done in Wikidata.  The
ID meaning should never change, and merging two IDs should leave a redirect
from one to the other.  I doubt that can be easily achievable.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Lester Caine]

On 27/09/17 19:46, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Lester, first and foremost, Wikidata is a system to connect the same
> Wikipedia articles in different languages. The "read this article in
> another language" links on the left side comes from Wikidata.  Wikidata
> has developed beyond this initial goal, but it remains the only way to
> identify Wikipedia articles in a language-neutral way, even if a
> specific Wikipedia article is renamed or deleted.

That formed no part of the early discussions on how wikidata should
work? I bowed out when the discussions were going down a path I did not
find to be at all useful. The current offering is certainly a lot more
'organised' than those original discussions. I WOULD still like to see a
storage model that allows third party lists to be managed and cross
referenced, but that does not fit the wikidata model. It is why I think
'another' cross-reference tool may be more appropriate with OSM and
wikipedia/wikidata simply being sources. THAT requires OSM to have a
'unique id' one can use to cross reference though :(

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Yves, see above - I listed 3 problems that I would like to solve. Do you
agree with them?
-- Dr. Yuri :)

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Yves  wrote:

> I add a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:brand:wikidata
> Wow.
> So, this tag is about adding an external reference that explains what the
> tag is? Really? This is not a joke?
>
> OSM is sick, please somebody call a doctor.
> Yves
>
>
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Yuri Astrakhan 
 wrote:

> I think we should re-start with the definition of the problems we are
> (hopefully) trying to solve, or else we might end up too far in the
> existential realm, which is fun to discuss, but should be left for another
> thread.
>
> * Problem #1:  In my analysis of OSM data, wikipedia tags quickly go stale
> because they use Wikipedia page titles, and titles are constantly renamed,
> deleted, and what's worse - old names are reused for new meanings.  This is
> a fundamental problem with all Wikipedia tags, such as wikipedia,
> brand:wikipedia, operator:wikipedia, etc, that needs solving. The solution
> does not need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than what we have.
>
> * Problem #2: the *meaning* of the "wikipedia" tag is ambiguous, and
> therefor cannot be processed easily. The top three meanings I have seen are:
>   a) This WP article is about this OSM feature (a so called 1:1 match,
> e.g. city, famous building, ...)
>   b) This WP article is about some aspect of this OSM feature, like its
> brand, tree species, or subject of the sculpture
>   c) Only a part of this WP article is about this OSM feature, e.g. a WP
> list of museums in the area contains description of this museum.
>
> * Problem #3: data consumers need cleaner, more machine-processable data.
> The text label is much more error prone than an ID:  McDonalds vs mcdonalds
> vs McDonald's vs ..., so having "brand=mcdonalds" results in many errors.
> Note that just because OSM default map skin may handle some of them
> correctly, each data consumer has to re-implement that logic, so the more
> ambiguous something is, the more likely it will result in errors and data
> omissions.
>
> The brand:wikidata discussion is about #1, #2b, and #3.
>
> Are we in agreement that these are problems, or do you think none of them
> need solving?
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Lester, first and foremost, Wikidata is a system to connect the same
Wikipedia articles in different languages. The "read this article in
another language" links on the left side comes from Wikidata.  Wikidata has
developed beyond this initial goal, but it remains the only way to identify
Wikipedia articles in a language-neutral way, even if a specific Wikipedia
article is renamed or deleted.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Lester Caine  wrote:

> On 27/09/17 17:40, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> >> Not on a number of articles I've recently been looking at while checking
> >> out the CURRENT wikidata offering. I've not found wikidata id's on the
> >> wikipedia articles I looked at ... but wikidata does seem something I
> >> should perhaps reassess.
> > You not having found them does not mean that they are not there.
> >
> > teh only Wikipedia articles with no Wikidata ID are those that are
> > newly created.
> >
> > Otherwise, you will find the "Wikidata item" link in the left-hand
> > navigation pane (using the default desktop view)
>
> AH - so it's stripped when you grab a printed copy of the article :(
> There may be a link to Wikimedia Commons material, but not to wikidata
> material in external links ... that is where I expected to find it ;)
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Yves]

I add a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:brand:wikidata
Wow. 
So, this tag is about adding an external reference that explains what the tag 
is? Really? This is not a joke? 

OSM is sick, please somebody call a doctor. 
Yves 

Le 27 septembre 2017 19:14:53 GMT+02:00, Mark Wagner  a 
écrit :
>On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 06:49:40 -0500 (CDT)
>Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
>
>> Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> > in different parts of the world  
>> 
>> IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.
>> 
>
>Two examples that can't be resolved by a spatial query:
>
>1) There is a business near me named "Maxwell House".  It is entirely
>unrelated to the coffee brand of that name, despite both companies
>operating in the same country.
>
>2) Until recently, there was a burger joint in town called "Sonic's"
>that was entirely unrelated to the chain of drive-in eateries.  (When
>the national chain opened up a location in town, they paid the existing
>restaurant to re-brand.)
>
>-- 
>Mark
>
>___
>talk mailing list
>talk@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Lester Caine]

On 27/09/17 17:40, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> Not on a number of articles I've recently been looking at while checking
>> out the CURRENT wikidata offering. I've not found wikidata id's on the
>> wikipedia articles I looked at ... but wikidata does seem something I
>> should perhaps reassess.
> You not having found them does not mean that they are not there.
> 
> teh only Wikipedia articles with no Wikidata ID are those that are
> newly created.
> 
> Otherwise, you will find the "Wikidata item" link in the left-hand
> navigation pane (using the default desktop view)

AH - so it's stripped when you grab a printed copy of the article :(
There may be a link to Wikimedia Commons material, but not to wikidata
material in external links ... that is where I expected to find it ;)

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Mark Wagner]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 06:49:40 -0500 (CDT)
Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> Andy Mabbett wrote:
> > in different parts of the world  
> 
> IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.
> 

Two examples that can't be resolved by a spatial query:

1) There is a business near me named "Maxwell House".  It is entirely
unrelated to the coffee brand of that name, despite both companies
operating in the same country.

2) Until recently, there was a burger joint in town called "Sonic's"
that was entirely unrelated to the chain of drive-in eateries.  (When
the national chain opened up a location in town, they paid the existing
restaurant to re-brand.)

-- 
Mark

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 17:31, Lester Caine  wrote:
> On 27/09/17 16:48, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> On 27 September 2017 at 16:06, Lester Caine  wrote:

>>> critically I'd prefer to see the wikipedia pages containing a link to
>>> the wikidata entry!
>>
>> They do.
>
> Not on a number of articles I've recently been looking at while checking
> out the CURRENT wikidata offering. I've not found wikidata id's on the
> wikipedia articles I looked at ... but wikidata does seem something I
> should perhaps reassess.

You not having found them does not mean that they are not there.

teh only Wikipedia articles with no Wikidata ID are those that are
newly created.

Otherwise, you will find the "Wikidata item" link in the left-hand
navigation pane (using the default desktop view)

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Lester Caine]

On 27/09/17 16:48, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> On 27 September 2017 at 16:06, Lester Caine  wrote:
> 
>>> While it is not yet complete, in what way is Wikdiata failing to be
>>> sufficiently reliable?
>>
>> Much of the work I did on wikipedia was stripped for all sorts of
>> reasons.
> 
> My question was about Wikidata's reliability, not yours ;-)

My experience of 'wikipedia' is bad and so that colours my thinking
about using wikidata! I know many of us who used to be contributors are
in the same boat ...

>> critically I'd prefer to see the wikipedia pages containing a link to
>> the wikidata entry!
> 
> They do.

Not on a number of articles I've recently been looking at while checking
out the CURRENT wikidata offering. I've not found wikidata id's on the
wikipedia articles I looked at ... but wikidata does seem something I
should perhaps reassess.

>>> That is exactly what Wikidata is for.
>>
>> But has yet to be formally adopted by OSM ... at which point the
>> wikidata id becomes the OSM unique reference?
> 
> I've not seen anyone advocate that.

Personally I'd prefer to see an OSM id I can use as an alternative to
wikidata ... with a few links to other datasources without relying on
wikidata.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Yuri Astrakhan]

I think we should re-start with the definition of the problems we are
(hopefully) trying to solve, or else we might end up too far in the
existential realm, which is fun to discuss, but should be left for another
thread.

* Problem #1:  In my analysis of OSM data, wikipedia tags quickly go stale
because they use Wikipedia page titles, and titles are constantly renamed,
deleted, and what's worse - old names are reused for new meanings.  This is
a fundamental problem with all Wikipedia tags, such as wikipedia,
brand:wikipedia, operator:wikipedia, etc, that needs solving. The solution
does not need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than what we have.

* Problem #2: the *meaning* of the "wikipedia" tag is ambiguous, and
therefor cannot be processed easily. The top three meanings I have seen are:
  a) This WP article is about this OSM feature (a so called 1:1 match, e.g.
city, famous building, ...)
  b) This WP article is about some aspect of this OSM feature, like its
brand, tree species, or subject of the sculpture
  c) Only a part of this WP article is about this OSM feature, e.g. a WP
list of museums in the area contains description of this museum.

* Problem #3: data consumers need cleaner, more machine-processable data.
The text label is much more error prone than an ID:  McDonalds vs mcdonalds
vs McDonald's vs ..., so having "brand=mcdonalds" results in many errors.
Note that just because OSM default map skin may handle some of them
correctly, each data consumer has to re-implement that logic, so the more
ambiguous something is, the more likely it will result in errors and data
omissions.

The brand:wikidata discussion is about #1, #2b, and #3.

Are we in agreement that these are problems, or do you think none of them
need solving?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-09-27 17:45 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> On 27 September 2017 at 16:00, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> > On Wednesday 27 September 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>   means that by
> >> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on
> >> something that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the
> >> generic Wikidata category for ice cream parlours, then I think I'd
> >> rather not have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.
> >
> > I am inclined to concur.
>
> So that's at least three of you tilting at the same windmill.
>


3+1
to say _what_ something is, we should not need wikidata, we should use our
tags and improve our system if it is not sufficient to distinguish what we
want to distinguish. I'm fine with linking osm objects to wikidata items,
where the item is an instance of something (is representing a particular
thing that is the same or very close to thing of the thing in OSM).

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 16:06, Lester Caine  wrote:

>> While it is not yet complete, in what way is Wikdiata failing to be
>> sufficiently reliable?
>
> Much of the work I did on wikipedia was stripped for all sorts of
> reasons.

My question was about Wikidata's reliability, not yours ;-)

> critically I'd prefer to see the wikipedia pages containing a link to
> the wikidata entry!

They do.

>> That is exactly what Wikidata is for.
>
> But has yet to be formally adopted by OSM ... at which point the
> wikidata id becomes the OSM unique reference?

I've not seen anyone advocate that.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 16:00, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 September 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>
>> In theory, almost everything we map could be expressed by a Wikidata
>> ID. If welcoming a Wikidata link on a city place node means that by
>> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on
>> something that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the
>> generic Wikidata category for ice cream parlours, then I think I'd
>> rather not have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.
>
> I am inclined to concur.

So that's at least three of you tilting at the same windmill.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Lester Caine]

On 27/09/17 14:40, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> On 27 September 2017 at 14:28, Lester Caine  wrote:
> 
>> wikidata provides a section which documents a range of LINKS which
>> identify the same object on other databases. It would be nice if there
>> was a stable identity on OSM that would populate an entry in THAT list.
> 
> Indeed so, but OSM does not, nor is it likely to in the foreseeable future.

The current 'risk' is that the wikidata identifier becomes the defacto
'standard' for defining OSM objects, and then we have to create wikidata
entries for new objects. In the past I did write wikipedia articles to
fill gaps in the past, but when entries get tidied up by other editors,
titles can be changed and we get broken links. At least wikidata id's
are static ... hopefully.

>> At some point it might be nice to eliminate all of the unnecessary links
>> like this in OSM if wikidata or somenewopesourcedata become a more
>> reliable source of such data.
> 
> While it is not yet complete, in what way is Wikdiata failing to be
> sufficiently reliable?

Much of the work I did on wikipedia was stripped for all sorts of
reasons. HOPEFULLY facts that exist will not be subject to the same
arbitrary treatment in wikidata, but I don't have much confidence still
to spend time contributing these days. I did not like the way wikidata
was structured originally but it does look like the problems have been
eliminated. We still need a lot more stubs replacing with real data? And
critically I'd prefer to see the wikipedia pages containing a link to
the wikidata entry!

>> Just a single link to a substantial set of additional data.
> 
> That is exactly what Wikidata is for.

But has yet to be formally adopted by OSM ... at which point the
wikidata id becomes the OSM unique reference?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 27 September 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> In theory, almost everything we map could be expressed by a Wikidata
> ID. If welcoming a Wikidata link on a city place node means that by
> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on
> something that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the
> generic Wikidata category for ice cream parlours, then I think I'd
> rather not have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.

I am inclined to concur.

The basis of accepting wikidata IDs in OSM originally was that it is 
difficult to reference a specific feature from our database from the 
outside and that wikidata provides stable IDs for real world objects 
and that it can be of significant use for OSM data users to be able to 
directly reference features in the OSM database describing the same 
real world objects through this ID.  There are a number of 
prerequisites for this however all of which have been put into question 
in recent discussion:

* There would need to be a 1:1 relationship between OSM features and the 
tagged wikidata ID (which apparently is often not the case for example 
for populated places, island countries etc.).
* The wikidata ID would need to be stable (recent statements that the 
wikidata IDs in the OSM database require constant maintenance to not 
become stale indicate otherwise).
* The wikidata ID would need to be verifiable - a local mapper with 
knowledge of the real world object represented by a certain OSM feature 
would need to be able to falsify the wikidata ID based on information 
readily available from wikidata (which does not always seem to be the 
case either).
* The wikidata IDs are at least for the most part manually added and 
verified by mappers with lokal knowledge - just like any other data in 
OSM (which clearly does not seem to be the case any more - i have no 
solid numbers here but certainly the majority of wikidata tags have 
been added without individual verification by mappers with local 
knowledge).

Everyone remember there is a big cultural difference between OSM and 
wikipedia (and i assume wikidata can be included there).  OSM is 
founded on local knowledge and original research while wikipedia 
rejects original research and values secondary sources of information.  
This fundamental difference also translates into differences in data 
models and different approaches to solving problems.  It is a good idea 
not to try pretending these differences do not exist and that you can 
intermix the two worlds without problems.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[John F. Eldredge]

The spatial information will tell you where each business location is; it 
is not sufficient to tell you whether these are multiple locations of the 
same brand, or two unrelated brands that share the same name and category 
of business.



On September 27, 2017 6:51:32 AM Richard Fairhurst  
wrote:



Andy Mabbett wrote:

in different parts of the world


IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 15:59:34 +0200
Frederik Ramm  wrote:
>
> "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on something that is, say, an ice cream
> parlour because Q123456 is the generic Wikidata category for ice
> cream parlours

I thought wikidata tags were for unique objets, which usage I believe
is welcome... If they are applied to categories then it is something
else entirely.

I would agree that the matching of a generic Openstreetmap tag to a
Wikidata identifier is Wikidata's business... But then maybe a
Wikidata-centric view of the model will consider it is Openstreetmap's
business...

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 14:59, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> We generally discourage foreign keys

We do? Citation please.

> If welcoming a Wikidata link on a city place node means that by
> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on something
> that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the generic
> Wikidata category for ice cream parlours, then I think I'd rather not
> have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.

This is a slippery-slope fallacy. Such equivalence should be entered
one, on the applicable key= or tag= page of the OSM wiki, like this:

   
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:amenity%3Dice_cream=1510821=1424407

just as it it should be recorded once in Wikidata, on the
corresponding item, using the "OpenStreetMap tag or key" property,
P1282, like this:

   https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1311064#P1282

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Marc Gemis]

I fail to understand how an external database can link to an OSM
location in case we do not allow foreign keys.
I know there is some vague "find something with a name similar to X in
some area Y" kind of strategy, but did somebody ever implemented such
a thing ?
I doubt that "area Y" is always known.

Suppose a tourist agency has some additional information an an hotel.
How can they link that information to the OSM object ? Do they have to
store the coordinates, then do a query for hotel with name X around
that location ? Is that the best method ?

Just curious.

m.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 27.09.2017 15:37, Simon Poole wrote:
>> My take is that it adds a nearly impossible to maintain (consider your
>> own Woolworth's example), non-speaking, foreign key
>
> We generally discourage foreign keys (that are only usable together with
> a different data set and that are not signposted locally).
>
> When Wikidata keys were first added to OSM, I thought this was something
> limited to place names of a certain importance and I didn't object.
>
> Seeing that this now leads to the automatic assumption that Wikidata IDs
> are practically admissible *everywhere* where Wikidata has defined an
> ID, I am having second thoughts about the whole issue.
>
> In theory, almost everything we map could be expressed by a Wikidata ID.
> If welcoming a Wikidata link on a city place node means that by
> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on something
> that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the generic
> Wikidata category for ice cream parlours, then I think I'd rather not
> have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Stefano]

2017-09-27 15:59 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm :

> Hi,
>
> On 27.09.2017 15:37, Simon Poole wrote:
> > My take is that it adds a nearly impossible to maintain (consider your
> > own Woolworth's example), non-speaking, foreign key
>
> We generally discourage foreign keys (that are only usable together with
> a different data set and that are not signposted locally).
>
> When Wikidata keys were first added to OSM, I thought this was something
> limited to place names of a certain importance and I didn't object.
>
> Seeing that this now leads to the automatic assumption that Wikidata IDs
> are practically admissible *everywhere* where Wikidata has defined an
> ID, I am having second thoughts about the whole issue.
>
> In theory, almost everything we map could be expressed by a Wikidata ID.
> If welcoming a Wikidata link on a city place node means that by
> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on something
> that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the generic
> Wikidata category for ice cream parlours,


This is wrong also for me. The "translation" between tagging systems should
be kept externally.


> then I think I'd rather not have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.
>


> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 14:37, Simon Poole  wrote:

> Am 27.09.2017 um 15:00 schrieb Andy Mabbett:

>> Tim Berners Lee coined the "Five Stars of Open Data"
>>
>> http://5stardata.info/en/

> You are assuming
> a) that an arbitrary best practice definition is relevant for OSM

It's not "arbitrary". You can find TBL's credentials here:

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

> b) that we get any real life brownie points for this outside of academia

I don't give a fig about (and most certainly did not refer to) "brownie points".

>> and that's what including Wikidata iDs in cases such as the above does.
>>
>> In fact, since that makes OSM more useful and thus more attractive to
>> re-users, it *does* matter to OSM.

> You still haven't given any specific real world use case in which
> brand:wikidata would actually be helpful and somebody would -really-
> want to consume it.

You didn't ask for one. But since you now do:

* A data consumer wants to render a map with logos of shops and restaurants

* A data consumer wants to link to Wikipedia articles about same, in
the local language

* A data consumer wants to calculate and compare the distances between
(or density of) the outlets of a particular brand, in different
countries, regardless of the script in which the plaintext name of the
brand has been entered.

> Outside of than that it would obviously be good for
> wikidata and for people going to linked data conferences.

That's the second time you've mentioned a supposed benefit to
Wikidata; any such benefit is minimal, and certainly not my - nor, I'm
sure, Yuri's - reason for wanting to fix the issues outlined in the
OP.

The conference comment is pure snark.

> My take is that it adds a nearly impossible to maintain (consider your
> own Woolworth's example), non-speaking, foreign key for additional
> information that is already  that is already quite adequately provided
> by the brand key.

Your take is mistaken, as shown previously.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 27.09.2017 15:37, Simon Poole wrote:
> My take is that it adds a nearly impossible to maintain (consider your
> own Woolworth's example), non-speaking, foreign key

We generally discourage foreign keys (that are only usable together with
a different data set and that are not signposted locally).

When Wikidata keys were first added to OSM, I thought this was something
limited to place names of a certain importance and I didn't object.

Seeing that this now leads to the automatic assumption that Wikidata IDs
are practically admissible *everywhere* where Wikidata has defined an
ID, I am having second thoughts about the whole issue.

In theory, almost everything we map could be expressed by a Wikidata ID.
If welcoming a Wikidata link on a city place node means that by
extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on something
that is, say, an ice cream parlour because Q123456 is the generic
Wikidata category for ice cream parlours, then I think I'd rather not
have any Wikidata links in OSM at all.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 14:28, Lester Caine  wrote:

> wikidata provides a section which documents a range of LINKS which
> identify the same object on other databases. It would be nice if there
> was a stable identity on OSM that would populate an entry in THAT list.

Indeed so, but OSM does not, nor is it likely to in the foreseeable future.

> At some point it might be nice to eliminate all of the unnecessary links
> like this in OSM if wikidata or somenewopesourcedata become a more
> reliable source of such data.

While it is not yet complete, in what way is Wikdiata failing to be
sufficiently reliable?

> Just a single link to a substantial set of additional data.

That is exactly what Wikidata is for.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Simon Poole]

Am 27.09.2017 um 15:00 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
> ...
>> Why would that matter to OSM?
> It may not, It certainly matters to OSM's users.
>
> Tim Berners Lee coined the "Five Stars of Open Data"
>
> http://5stardata.info/en/
>
> defining best practice in publishing open data. OSM already meets the
> first four, well. The fifth is:
>
>  *  link your data to other data to provide context
You are assuming
a) that an arbitrary best practice definition is relevant for OSM
b) that we get any real life brownie points for this outside of academia

>
> and that's what including Wikidata iDs in cases such as the above does.
>
> In fact, since that makes OSM more useful and thus more attractive to
> re-users, it *does* matter to OSM.
You still haven't given any specific real world use case in which
brand:wikidata would actually be helpful and somebody would -really-
want to consume it. Outside of than that it would obviously be good for
wikidata and for people going to linked data conferences.

My take is that it adds a nearly impossible to maintain (consider your
own Woolworth's example), non-speaking, foreign key for additional
information that is already  that is already quite adequately provided
by the brand key.
 
Simon









signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Lester Caine]

( Thought I hit 'reply list' :) )

On 26/09/17 23:47, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Here is a query that finds all wikidata IDs frequently used in
> "brand:wikidata", and shows OSM objects whose "wikidata" points to the
> same. I would like to replace all such wikidata/wikipedia tags with the
> corresponding brand:wikidata/brand:wikipedia.  Most of them are in
> India, but there are some in Europe and other places.  This query can be
> used directly from JOSM as well.

wikidata provides a section which documents a range of LINKS which
identify the same object on other databases. It would be nice if there
was a stable identity on OSM that would populate an entry in THAT list.
This would then allow cross checking of any link.

At some point it might be nice to eliminate all of the unnecessary links
like this in OSM if wikidata or somenewopesourcedata become a more
reliable source of such data. Just a single link to a substantial set of
additional data.

So ... where does 'brand:' come from? Should this not simply be 'link:'?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 12:49, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> Andy Mabbett wrote:

>> in different parts of the world
>
> IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.

For some reason I can't determine, you quote me out-of-context; the
context was that we were discussing the assertion that "object type +
brand(s) should essentially always be unique".

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 12:57, Simon Poole  wrote:

>> For example, until the UK version went titsup a few years back, there
>> were chains of stores in the UK and in Australia, each called
>> "Woolworths". Though they had common roots, they were not the same.

> Why would that matter to OSM?

It may not, It certainly matters to OSM's users.

Tim Berners Lee coined the "Five Stars of Open Data"

http://5stardata.info/en/

defining best practice in publishing open data. OSM already meets the
first four, well. The fifth is:

 *  link your data to other data to provide context

and that's what including Wikidata iDs in cases such as the above does.

In fact, since that makes OSM more useful and thus more attractive to
re-users, it *does* matter to OSM.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Simon Poole]

Am 27.09.2017 um 13:30 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
>
> For example, until the UK version went titsup a few years back, there
> were chains of stores in the UK and in Australia, each called
> "Woolworths". Though they had common roots, they were not the same.
>
>
Why would that matter to OSM?

Given that they are already disambiguated by geography?

And that if you are looking for a "Woolworths" in Australia you don't
really care if there is/was a chain of the same name in the UK?

PS: in OSM  such brands tend end up in the name tag in any case



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Richard Fairhurst]

Andy Mabbett wrote:
> in different parts of the world

IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 27 September 2017 at 10:07, Simon Poole  wrote:

> While I can understand adding WP and WD tags to objects of note, why on
> earth would we want to add all this redundancy to OSM objects at all?

The question incudes the false premise that this is redundancy: It is
not, it adds disambiguation.

> Particularly given that object type + brand(s) should essentially always be
> unique

You're prepared to guarantee that there are not two different chains,
in the same business, in different parts of the world, with the same
name? I'm not.

For example, until the UK version went titsup a few years back, there
were chains of stores in the UK and in Australia, each called
"Woolworths". Though they had common roots, they were not the same.

> anybody that wants to look up WD keys could do so via a simple external table.

Please can you tell us where to find these tables?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Andy Mabbett]

On 26 September 2017 at 23:47, Yuri Astrakhan  wrote:

> Here is a query that finds all wikidata IDs frequently used in
> "brand:wikidata", and shows OSM objects whose "wikidata" points to the same.
> I would like to replace all such wikidata/wikipedia tags with the
> corresponding brand:wikidata/brand:wikipedia.

Thank you. I support this proposal.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Simon Poole]

While I can understand adding WP and WD tags to objects of note, why on
earth would we want to add all this redundancy to OSM objects at all?
Particularly given that object type + brand(s) should essentially always
be unique, anybody that wants to look up WD keys could do so via a
simple external table.

Simon

Note I'm talking about the usefulness for OSM here, that it would be
useful for WD is clear.


Am 27.09.2017 um 00:47 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> Here is a query that finds all wikidata IDs frequently used in
> "brand:wikidata", and shows OSM objects whose "wikidata" points to the
> same. I would like to replace all such wikidata/wikipedia tags with
> the corresponding brand:wikidata/brand:wikipedia.  Most of them are in
> India, but there are some in Europe and other places.  This query can
> be used directly from JOSM as well.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/y72afjpy
>
> BTW, this type of queries might be good for maproulette challenges
> once they can work more like osmose.
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[PanierAvide]

Hello,

Thank you for this query, which will be very useful for detecting these 
issues. I'm not sure if this is possible in the current state of 
Wikidata, but can't we retrieve all shop chains brands, and then query 
OSM to find object having wikidata tag pointing to one of the brands ? 
If data is structured enough on Wikidata side, we would have a better 
way to retrieve more of the OSM issues.


Regards,

Adrien.


Le 27/09/2017 à 00:47, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit :
Here is a query that finds all wikidata IDs frequently used in 
"brand:wikidata", and shows OSM objects whose "wikidata" points to the 
same. I would like to replace all such wikidata/wikipedia tags with 
the corresponding brand:wikidata/brand:wikipedia.  Most of them are in 
India, but there are some in Europe and other places.  This query can 
be used directly from JOSM as well.


http://tinyurl.com/y72afjpy

BTW, this type of queries might be good for maproulette challenges 
once they can work more like osmose.


--
PanierAvide
Géomaticien & développeur


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Here is a query that finds all wikidata IDs frequently used in
"brand:wikidata", and shows OSM objects whose "wikidata" points to the
same. I would like to replace all such wikidata/wikipedia tags with the
corresponding brand:wikidata/brand:wikipedia.  Most of them are in India,
but there are some in Europe and other places.  This query can be used
directly from JOSM as well.

http://tinyurl.com/y72afjpy

BTW, this type of queries might be good for maproulette challenges once
they can work more like osmose.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk