Works for me too. The only thing someone needs to make sure when introducing the agiv/crab data is that the housenumbers from 'erfgoed' matches the new data. 'Erfgoed' is usually very accurate using housenumber ranges as well as lists. (eg. nr: 2-4 or 2;4 )
When a situation occurs that the numbers seem to indicate a more complex site , I will then check the links to sort these out as you might loose valuable information when merging tags blindly. Thanks for your work Marc, it's been a pleasure building further on it. Glenn On 17-11-15 16:21, Marc Gemis wrote: > Thanks for explaining the problems you encountered. > > Since those early onroerend erfgoed nodes, I have changed my mapping > habits. This means that I solve the problems that you mention (1 > historic item matching multiple buildings/1 building/part of a > building) myself now. > > At this moment I still do both building drawing and adding house > numbers in 1 go, but I prefer to work more in residential areas > (individual houses) than town centers (rows of houses). > > regards > > m > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> wrote: >> I agree, since there were not too many individual houses in the city, it >> was a lot better (plus nominatim can find nodes addresses). They were >> -for a long time- the only house numbers we had in OSM. >> >> Sometimes it's in fact difficult as a monument can be a facade which >> encompasses 3 house numbers. So I had to check the 'onroerenderfgoed' >> links to make sure what house numbers they refer to. >> >> Often it's a 1 on 1 downward merge , but I've seen plenty of cases where >> there is a 1-house size offset. >> >> All in all, I would say AGIV is pretty accurate for Mechelen (I did all >> of Zemst, Bonheiden and Mechelen now) but there are still issues of more >> recent data not being there (and the house + number exist). New >> street(names), demolished buildings still in the AGIV database etc. it's >> never complete. But I believe the results OSM Mechelen vs Google >> Mechelen is worth it. >> http://aptum.bitless.be/?pcode=2800&loadOsm=true&collapsedSections= >> >> You also need a house/building to be there to work efficiently, I found >> a lot of errors on corners ( that leaded me to the conclusion that most >> house numbers where 'guessed' by using other sources , or by >> extrapolating, not too scientific. >> >> I think I did a lot of them now. wish I had a decent analysis tool to >> show me exactly how much crab work I've done so far, but to conclude: >> >> - having decent buildings before migration house numbers is almost >> essential. >> - mapping houses together with numbers is painstakingly slow. Better >> create houses first, then later on (days, months, whatever) they will be >> visible on the map when you start with phase 2: >> - mapping house numbers. Sanders tool is essential, especially the >> integration with JOSM remote control. >> - extra care needs to be taken when you have existing data, associated >> street relations will be deleted (most of them yours too ;-) once a road >> is completed, all the houses are there. >> - Sometimes there is NO house number attached to the 'erfgoed', So I >> have to check the inventory to see what it applies to. >> - Sometimes is also needed to make it more complex, like >> https://inventaris.onroerenderfgoed.be/dibe/relict/88684 -> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5620662 >> - There have been occasions where I used the erfgoed information to >> validate a house number. >> >> You don't want to change the house number on the erfgoed itself, as that >> would be inacurate, just to accommodate the map (or routers), hence you >> need to change that single node into a site relation (which I think is >> very well suited for this) >> >> I believe that was a good call you made by making nodes. migration that >> information with the terracing plugin is as easy as doing CTRL+shift+T >> >> Cheers! >> >> Glenn >> >> On 17-11-15 13:30, Marc Gemis wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Glenn Plas <gl...@byte-consult.be> wrote: >>>> and I encountered many >>>> 'monumenten' from you, which I nicely migrated from node to buildings :) >>> >>> that's very kind of you. I didn't do that from the beginning, because >>> it was too difficult to find the location of the house numbers back >>> then. We didn't had AGIV CRAB. I thought individual nodes were easier >>> to merge/reposition than badly shaped/positioned building areas. >>> >>> What is your opinion ? >>> >>> regards >>> >>> m >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-be mailing list >>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-be mailing list >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
