On 1 Jun 2010, at 15:39, Chris Hill wrote:

> Peter Miller wrote:
>> We have created a map layer for Potlatch showing OS Locator names   
>> which are not in the nearby OSM data in a nice visual way.
>>
>> Details in our blog post of the subject.
>> http://itoworld.blogspot.com/2010/05/os-locator-validation-mapping-for-uk.html
>>
>> To access the tiles paste the following into the custom layer box  
>> in  Potlatch (or similar in JOSM).
>> http://tiles.itoworld.com/os_locator/!/!/!.png
>>
>> Note our proposed 'not:name' tag for suppressing errors in OS  
>> Locator  data. This could be extended to 'not:ref' and 'not:access'  
>> etc etc. I  hope there is not another convention for blocking tag  
>> values that we  have overlooked. If there is we will of course  
>> adjust our code to  accommodate it.
>>
>> there is a 48 hour delay until new data appears on the tiles. Ie,   
>> monday edits will appear on wednesday etc.
>>
>>
>>
>
> On a rainy afternoon I took a look at your overlay and I think it is  
> potentially very useful. The main issue I guess is this new tag. I  
> think "not:*" is imaginative, but it rankles with me somehow. How  
> about just putting source:name=survey on roads that contradict OS  
> Locator to show they have been checked on the ground.

I was envisaging a technical development where the server would refuse  
to accept tag values that contradicted a not: tag, or possibly it was  
PotLatch that did so for it. To override the block one could of course  
delete the tag, but in time the removal of 'not' tags might be  
patrolled from the minutely diffs.

There is an equivalent in Wikipedia where one gets a message saying  
'an article of that name has already been deleted, please read the  
discussion before recreating it'. The message here would be 'someone  
suggested that that was not the right value for the tag, could you  
check and then try again'.

For our more limited purposes we need a clear message in the data that  
means 'don't keep on highlighting this discrepancy between OSM and OS  
Locator' and I think that data belongs in OSM rather than in some ITO  
DB.


>
> I will certainly use your work to check any street that shows up on  
> 'my patch'.

Great stuff.

Peter


>
> Cheers, Chris


_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Reply via email to