Nick and Josh thanks for the clarification on your upload strategy. With previous large uploads I have experience the same behaviour resulting in massive dupes. So I guess it is not a conversion issue.
If you want me to commit the remove duplicates changeset, I can do so. But you will have to go through the data subsequently and check if the issues are resolved and no new ones emerged. M On 22.03.2012, at 14:12, Nick Chamberlain wrote: > Josh and Marc, > > Thank you! I apologize that I'm unable to speak the OSM language as > well as everyone, I'm working on it :) I posted on the Salisbury, > Maryland Import page that Josh created to give more detail about my > uploads. > > I didn't really think that I created so many duplicates, because I did a > lot of things in JOSM before I actually chose to upload. One thing I > know for sure is that I didn't I upload until I was actually able to - I > was getting a proxy error and the uploads were timing out when I > attempted to upload the entire batch. I assumed that these attempts > were unsuccessful, which I might be wrong about and might have resulted > in duplication. > > I assumed that my successful attempts started, maybe @ 10901673, when I > realized I needed to break the original shapefile up tabularly into > percentiles and upload 10 segments of the building footprint dataset, > one after the other. These were all definitely successful, and were > only done once per percentile. > > Josh, where are you finding the list of changesets in the format you > posted? I can only figure out how to list them in my editor profile > with my comments. > > If you believe that the method you mention that removes the 71,000 nodes > is the best approach, please feel free to do so. I will also gladly > manually fix the inner ring tagging issue as the data gets fixed. > Please let me know what I can do to help. I am also willing to share > the .osm files and/or shapefiles if that will help. Thanks. > > - Nick > > -----Original Message----- > From: joshthephysic...@gmail.com [mailto:joshthephysic...@gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Josh Doe > Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:51 AM > To: Marc Zoss > Cc: impo...@openstreetmap.org; talk-us@openstreetmap.org; Nick > Chamberlain > Subject: Re: [Imports] [Talk-us] Uploads to City of Salisbury, MD > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Marc Zoss <marcz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I briefly downloaded all sby:bldgtype-tagged ways and relation of > Maryland through the overpass-api. Then removed the ones having only a > sby:bldgtype tag, run the validator and deleted the duplicated nodes and > ways. >> This would result in a changeset to remove the roughly 71'000 > duplicates nodes and ways. >> >> If the area was edited since the import and reverting gets tricky, > this might be the option to go, at least the result looks ok at the > first glance. >> >> Please also note that the conversion step seems to add a building=yes > tag on on inner ring of building polygons () which is certainly bad > tagging, despite the correct rendering (52 occurrences, so could be > fixed manually). > > Thanks for doing that, as that was the next step I was going to try. I > posted some regarding the changesets here: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Nick_SPW#Salisbury.2C_Maryl > and_import > > I think perhaps we should revert a subset of the changesets, such as the > dangling nodes, and then use your method to handle the rest. > > -Josh _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
