Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Paul Berry]

Indeed, so long as you ignore https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/52528295,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/134635221, etc ;)

Feel free to adjust the mapping!

Regards,
*Paul*

> By the way, there is at least one "sensibly mapped" university in
> Cambridge:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3987047
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Russ Garrett]

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 at 21:37, Alan Mackie  wrote:
> On a completely unrelated note. Does any software actually support site 
> relations?

openinframap.org does, for power plants (wind farms etc). I suspect it
may be the only one.

-- 
Russ Garrett
r...@garrett.co.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Alan Mackie]

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 at 15:46, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Feb 4, 2020, 16:37 by talk-gb@openstreetmap.org:
>
> >> (Ironically, the current tagging makes it hard for me to search to see
> >> if there's a "proper" amenity=university in there somewhere, e.g. as a
> >> relation or area covering a large swathe of them.)
> >
> >There isn't, I'm afraid.. it's a right hotchpotch
> IMHO, it would be a waste of time, if you tried to create a single area
> object (do I mean "closed way"?) to be the university.
>
> Or multipolygon, like for https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3830877
>
> The University is a collection of colleges, so could be a relation...
>  ...except that each college is probably in several buildings and they may
> not be in a contiguous area, so each college might have to be a relation of
> buildings.  So you would have a hierarchy of relations.
>
> Or areas that belong to multipolygon of college and multipolygon of
> university (?)
>
> We used to enjoy the look of puzzlement on the faces of (mostly American)
> tourists, who stood in the middle of town, surrounded by colleges, mixed in
> with shops, offices and other buildings, and asked which way to go to the
> University.
>
> :) In this case university multipolygon (or closed way) covering most of
> city center
> sounds correct and would help OSM-using tourists.
> 
>

Isn't this what site relations are for? That way POI nodes etc also
belonging to the University can be included.

On a completely unrelated note. Does any software actually support site
relations?
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Andy Townsend]

On 04/02/2020 15:37, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote:

>There isn't, I'm afraid.. it's a right hotchpotch

IMHO, it would be a waste of time, if you tried to create a single 
area object (do I mean "closed way"?) to be the university.  That 
would just be most of the city centre.


The University is a collection of colleges, so could be a relation... 
 ...except that each college is probably in several buildings and they 
may not be in a contiguous area, so each college might have to be a 
relation of buildings.  So you would have a hierarchy of relations.



... or, if the general feeling is to go ahead with this change, just add 
a node in the vicinity of the Senate House / St Mary's Church for it.  
It'd be no less wrong.


By the way, there is at least one "sensibly mapped" university in Cambridge:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3987047

Best Regards,

Andy



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB]

Feb 4, 2020, 16:37 by talk-gb@openstreetmap.org:

> >> (Ironically, the current tagging makes it hard for me to search to see
> >> if there's a "proper" amenity=university in there somewhere, e.g. as a
> >> relation or area covering a large swathe of them.)
> >
> >There isn't, I'm afraid.. it's a right hotchpotch
> IMHO, it would be a waste of time, if you tried to create a single area 
> object (do I mean "closed way"?) to be the university.  
>
Or multipolygon, like for https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3830877

> The University is a collection of colleges, so could be a relation...   
> ...except that each college is probably in several buildings and they may not 
> be in a contiguous area, so each college might have to be a relation of 
> buildings.  So you would have a hierarchy of relations.
>
Or areas that belong to multipolygon of college and multipolygon of university 
(?)

> We used to enjoy the look of puzzlement on the faces of (mostly American) 
> tourists, who stood in the middle of town, surrounded by colleges, mixed in 
> with shops, offices and other buildings, and asked which way to go to the 
> University.
>
:) In this case university multipolygon (or closed way) covering most of city 
center 
sounds correct and would help OSM-using tourists.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB]

Feb 4, 2020, 15:14 by talk-gb@openstreetmap.org:

> Hi
> There was a discussion 5 years ago. There may have been others.
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017455.html
>
> Many amenity=university tags were added unnecessarily to building=yes
> A contributor had converted these to building=university, in accordance with 
> the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Duniversity
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40649767
> This allows the removal of the amenity tags without loss of data.
>
+1

I assume that individual buildings are not separate universities? I would expect
one area (maybe multipolygon) for one university.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

>> (Ironically, the current tagging makes it hard for me to search to see
>> if there's a "proper" amenity=university in there somewhere, e.g. as a
>> relation or area covering a large swathe of them.)
>
>There isn't, I'm afraid.. it's a right hotchpotch

IMHO, it would be a waste of time, if you tried to create a single area object 
(do I mean "closed way"?) to be the university.  That would just be most of the 
city centre.   
The University is a collection of colleges, so could be a relation...   
...except that each college is probably in several buildings and they may not 
be in a contiguous area, so each college might have to be a relation of 
buildings.  So you would have a hierarchy of relations.
Then, I assume that there will be some buildings that belong to the University, 
but not to any college.  That was certainly true of my Uni (it lies about 70 
miles West of Cambridge and is a darker blue), where the Engineering Building, 
Physics labs, Museum, Examination Halls were all University assets. We used to 
enjoy the look of puzzlement on the faces of (mostly American) tourists, who 
stood in the middle of town, surrounded by colleges, mixed in with shops, 
offices and other buildings, and asked which way to go to the University.
Regards,Peter

On Tuesday, 4 February 2020, 15:15:38 GMT, Dave F via Talk-GB 
 wrote:  
 
 On 04/02/2020 14:28, Dan S wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> I agree with what you suggest. Can we be a bit precise though about
> what you propose? You're proposing to remove amenity=university from
> building=university in Cambridge, and make no other tagging changes?

That's correct. I'm going to load the 1050 return by this overpass query 
into JOSM:
[bbox:{{bbox}}];
nwr[amenity=university][building=university];
out meta geom;

plus another 7 which are still tagged as building=yes.

> (Ironically, the current tagging makes it hard for me to search to see
> if there's a "proper" amenity=university in there somewhere, e.g. as a
> relation or area covering a large swathe of them.)

There isn't, I'm afraid.. it's a right hotchpotch

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/QnH

These are the remaining 117 amenity=university which will need to be 
rectified at a later date..

Cheers
DaveF
> Op di 4 feb. 2020 om 14:15 schreef Dave F via Talk-GB
> :
>> Hi
>> There was a discussion 5 years ago. There may have been others.
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017455.html
>>
>> Many amenity=university tags were added unnecessarily to building=yes
>> A contributor had converted these to building=university, in accordance
>> with the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Duniversity
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40649767
>> This allows the removal of the amenity tags without loss of data.
>>
>> The user who created his disparate tagging schema has had plenty of time
>> to rectify.  I think this should be performed now.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
  ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Dave F via Talk-GB]

On 04/02/2020 14:28, Dan S wrote:

Hi Dave,

I agree with what you suggest. Can we be a bit precise though about
what you propose? You're proposing to remove amenity=university from
building=university in Cambridge, and make no other tagging changes?


That's correct. I'm going to load the 1050 return by this overpass query 
into JOSM:

[bbox:{{bbox}}];
nwr[amenity=university][building=university];
out meta geom;

plus another 7 which are still tagged as building=yes.


(Ironically, the current tagging makes it hard for me to search to see
if there's a "proper" amenity=university in there somewhere, e.g. as a
relation or area covering a large swathe of them.)


There isn't, I'm afraid.. it's a right hotchpotch

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/QnH

These are the remaining 117 amenity=university which will need to be 
rectified at a later date..


Cheers
DaveF

Op di 4 feb. 2020 om 14:15 schreef Dave F via Talk-GB
:

Hi
There was a discussion 5 years ago. There may have been others.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017455.html

Many amenity=university tags were added unnecessarily to building=yes
A contributor had converted these to building=university, in accordance
with the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Duniversity

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40649767
This allows the removal of the amenity tags without loss of data.

The user who created his disparate tagging schema has had plenty of time
to rectify.  I think this should be performed now.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

Hi Dave,

I agree with what you suggest. Can we be a bit precise though about
what you propose? You're proposing to remove amenity=university from
building=university in Cambridge, and make no other tagging changes?

(Ironically, the current tagging makes it hard for me to search to see
if there's a "proper" amenity=university in there somewhere, e.g. as a
relation or area covering a large swathe of them.)

Best
Dan

Op di 4 feb. 2020 om 14:15 schreef Dave F via Talk-GB
:
>
> Hi
> There was a discussion 5 years ago. There may have been others.
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017455.html
>
> Many amenity=university tags were added unnecessarily to building=yes
> A contributor had converted these to building=university, in accordance
> with the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Duniversity
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40649767
> This allows the removal of the amenity tags without loss of data.
>
> The user who created his disparate tagging schema has had plenty of time
> to rectify.  I think this should be performed now.
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Dave F via Talk-GB]

Hi
There was a discussion 5 years ago. There may have been others.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017455.html

Many amenity=university tags were added unnecessarily to building=yes
A contributor had converted these to building=university, in accordance 
with the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Duniversity


https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40649767
This allows the removal of the amenity tags without loss of data.

The user who created his disparate tagging schema has had plenty of time 
to rectify.  I think this should be performed now.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Mappa Mercia this Thursday

[Ian Caldwell via Talk-gb-westmidlands]

I hope to be there.

Ian


On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 18:14, Brian Prangle  wrote:

> Good for me - I'll be there
>
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 13:12, Rob Nickerson 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> By my calendar it is the next meetup this coming Thursday. I am assuming
>> central Birmingham, likely at The Bull...?
>>
>> *Rob*
>> ___
>> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
>> Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
>>
> ___
> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
> Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands