On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Frank Steggink <stegg...@steggink.org>wrote:
> Hi, > > I think to know what is going on. I've tried to convert the residential > areas of 031I08 myself, and I got an OSM file with an outer polygon. > However, the outer polygon has no tags. Also, it looks that Sam's batch > files run shp-to-osm with the -t parameter, which suppresses the output of > features without any tags. > > Solution: > * shp-to-osm needs to be adjusted, so that the outer polygon will get the > tags, but the inner polygons will not. > Im running the script how with that change.. to see how it works... > * shp-to-osm should be called without the -t parameter. > Is this possible? > > However, that means for tiles that have no residential areas a file with the size of 0 bytes will be created. (not a problem, as i could do that for all the features... but you'd end up with 80 0meg files. that would cause a headache when someone looks at it for the 1st time) ... or we could just do that for residential areas. What i DID do was create an 'extra' file, in the 'extra' folder, that extended the max nodes to 2 million. (or i could just remove that toggle), and a full .osm file will be created. ... but remember that the API can only handle 2000 nodes. and what i also did was create a 3rd line on the bat file that omits the '-t' and also in the 'extra' folder, as that should do the trick. Frank > > Frank Steggink wrote: > >> Hi Sam, >> >> I've just downloaded some CanVec data, and had a look at sheets 031I07 and >> -08. I wonder what you mean by uploading all "sub-residential files". I >> understand that the data is separated over multiple files, because of >> certain limitations. In the residential OSM files I also see no polygons >> with a multipolygon relationship of "outer". So,this means that the outlines >> of places like Trois-Rivieres and others are missing. The same issue is >> going on with wooded areas. The data is converted with Canvec2OSM version >> 0.9.4. >> >> I had a closer look at the raster file (from Toporama) of sheet 031I08, >> because there is much less data, and I looked at the village of Gentilly >> (see [1]). This is in the center of the sheet. The raster file suggests that >> a multipolygon relationship should be in place, but the vector file >> (BS_1370009_2_Residential_area0.osm) shows only the two inner polygons. Are >> the outer polygons stored in a different file, or are they not converted at >> all? The shape of the outer polygon doesn't look to be complex, so I don't >> think the max_nodes threshold would be exceeded. Looking at the OSM file: >> there is only one multipolygon relationship in it, but it only refers to the >> two inner polygons, and not to any outer polygon at all. >> >> One note regarding multipolygons: the inner polygons shouldn't have any >> tags at all. See [2]. >> > Ya, i noticed that with the water features i was playing with the other day. So that needs to have a closer look into. > >> Anyways, some clarifications about what is going on, and how the data >> should be interpreted would be welcome. >> > Thats where the readme.txt file comes in to play. As it gives some instructions. But it might need a little fixing up. > I'm reluctant to import data which looks not correct. For the rest, keep >> up your good work :) >> > Thanks :) > >> Regards, >> >> Frank >> >> [1] http://osm.org/go/cKHX9ApT- >> [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon >> >> Sam Vekemans wrote: >> >> >>> Hi Richard, >>> i think your refering to the large multi-polygons such as >>> 'residential_area', and it 'appears' to be inverted. >>> >>> Here's the majic; when all the sub- residential.osm files are uploaded >>> to OSM, it renders correctly. >>> In JOSM, you need to zoom out and load the area, to see it. >>> >>> I think i'll load a region of NFLD in the next cuple days to test my >>> hypothises. >>> >>> Sam >>> >>> ps. I cc'd talk-ca as this was mentioned b4. >>> >>> On 9/22/09, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Dear gentlemen, >>>> >>>> I've had a look at some of Sam's test areas. In 1435 files there are >>>> zero occurrences of Relation=outer. >>>> >>>> So at some point we started calling relation=outer, relation=inner or >>>> completely dropping outer relations by mistake. >>>> >>>> I do still see rare nested ways, but both are marked as inner, and are >>>> on separate layers after --maxnodes >>>> >>>> I've run 0.6.1 again with an old rules file and see the same problem >>>> so I believe that this is an issue in shp-to-osm. >>>> >>>> Ian can you check a 0.5.0 - generated file and see if it contains any >>>> "outer"? >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Richard >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-ca mailing list >> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >> >> >> > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca