These txt reports with IDs are not too visual, can you create any renderable file for josm (.osm for example) or screenshot to show the community what it really means? Are the building under question random or somehow in specific areas etc. I dont know if there is any "test osm server” for such experiments nowadays somewhere, probably not.
Jaak > On 24 Sep 2019, at 07:50, SviMik <svi...@mail.ru> wrote: > > I have analyzed the largest verbatium's import (changesets 591093, 579407, > 572107, 569277, 569055 (ways) + 561094, 559707, 558636, 558056, 557568, > 557358, 557193, 556899 (nodes only)), which was made in 2008. That covers > 86.7% of all his edits. > The import was covering Tallinn, Saue and Maardu. Turned out verbatium wasn't > particulary active outside Harjumaa. > There were total 67813 ways imported, 9032 of them are already deleted by > other editors, and 17878 were changed either in geometry or tags* department > (15529 has a geometry change, and 5077 has a tag change), which leaves 40903 > buildings for deletion. > * I did not count the following tags because they are part of my imports > anyway: addr:city, addr:country, addr:housenumber, addr:street, maaamet:ETAK, > maaamet:orig_tunnus, source, source:addr, addr2:* > * If some change was reverted I do not count it as a change, because I only > compare the first and the last version > > Here is the list of ways for deletion: > http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways_unchanged1.txt > > Here is the full report for all the 67813 ways: > http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways1.csv > > Full list of his changesets: > http://svimik.com/verbatium_changesets.xls > > Currently, the bbox of his changesets has 91324 buildings, which means... > We're gonna delete 44.79% of Saue-Tallinn-Maardu buildings. That gonna be > interesting. Should we split it by 10k for example? Or just start with Maardu > and see what happens? > > > Воскресенье, 15 сентября 2019, 9:42 +03:00 от "Jaak Laineste" > <j...@nutiteq.com>: >> Hoi, >> >> Jah, need peaks kustutama. Enne võiks teha muudatuse analüüsi - kui palju ja >> kus kustutataks, ega mõned linnad kohe väga tühjaks ei jää. >> >> Jaak >> >> p.s. sama asi ka corine impordi osade tag-idega, näiteks põllud (field), need >> on pigem müra kui info kaardil. >> >> >> >>> On 14 Sep 2019, at 15:34, SviMik via Talk-ee <talk-ee@openstreetmap.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi everyone! >>> >>> I'd like to discuss the import made by verbatium in 2008: >>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/569055 >>> (...and other similar changesets) >>> >>> There are two issues with that import: >>> 1. Unknown data source with unknown license (probably it was a Garmin map >> judging by the Type=0x13 tag) >>> 2. Poor quality of the data. If you see a building distorted like this: >> http://svimik.com/verbatiumimport1.png >>> - you can be sure it's verbatium's. Maybe it was OK in 2008, but in 2019 we >> have much better options. >>> >>> What can be done: >>> 1. Remove all buildings which geometry and tags were not edited since the >> initial import. For the tags the following exceptions can be made because >> they >> were automatic edits: >>> - User xybot has fixed the tag typo (buildung=yes) in the initial import and >> added its own tag (created_by=xybot) >>> - User juhanjuku has removed the Type=0x13 and created_by=xybot tags >>> - User SviMik_import has imported the address tags to these buildings from >> the Maa-amet database (nothing that can't be imported again) >>> 2. Proceed with the Maa-amet building import as usual >>> >>> It will solve: >>> 1. The license issue (if there is any) >>> 2. The quality issue (if you agree there is an issue) >>> 3. Will update the map in general, for example the demolished buildings will >> be removed from OSM. >>> >>> For buildings which geometry was changed by other contributors after the >> initial import - we can assume both license and quality issues were solved >> since they no longer contain the imported geometry. I know it's a grey field, >> and I'm not sure it works like that, but at least these buildings do have >> some >> excuse to stay. >>> >>> For buildings which geometry was NOT changed, but some POI tags were added - >> let them stay for now and discuss it later if needed. I suspect it will be a >> rare case, but the exact number is unknown right now. >>> >>> Questions: >>> 1. Has anyone else digged into the issue, maybe asked verbatium himself? >>> 2. Can anyone confirm that the import indeed has the license problem? >>> 3. Is the proposed plan good? (in case if you agree that it needs to be >> fixed) >>> >>> -- >>> SviMik >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-ee mailing list >>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee >> >> > > > -- > Svjatoslav Mikhailov _______________________________________________ Talk-ee mailing list Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
