Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

On Monday 20 March 2017, Andreas Vilén wrote: > > It's not up to me to decide if this data is to be deleted or not. If > you want to do that, raise the question with each respective > country's mailing list. I don't want to push the issue - and there is little chance for such a suggestion

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 07:15:47AM +0100, Jochen Topf wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 06:27:05AM +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote: > > It's not up to me to decide if this data is to be deleted or not. If > > you want to do that, raise the question with each respective country's > > mailing list. > > I

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 06:27:05AM +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote: > It's not up to me to decide if this data is to be deleted or not. If > you want to do that, raise the question with each respective country's > mailing list. I was under the impression that were in contact with the Swedish community

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

There is a difference between data errors that the osmi will detect and bad quality map data. Corine is the latter. It's not up to me to decide if this data is to be deleted or not. If you want to do that, raise the question with each respective country's mailing list. /Andreas Skickat från

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

On Sunday 19 March 2017, Andreas Vilén wrote: > > Also, as has been pointed out earlier, Corine data might be bad, but > does not contain that many pure data errors as we define them. That is not quite accurate in my experience. As i explained in

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 18 Mar 2017, at 21:40, Sandor Seres wrote: > > In another style, typical land related names are on the water like here > http://osm.org/go/0Tt1PZIt-?layers=T . > > > seems like

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

Also if I remember correctly the whole point was to optimize/be able to process osm data faster by not having to deal with so many errors(each case can slow down the processing) On Mar 19, 2017 7:23 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 19 Mar

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

sent from a phone > On 19 Mar 2017, at 10:03, Andreas Vilén wrote: > > The main problem with Corine is that oftentimes the landuse data overlaps > villages (which I found when I mapped mountain villages in southern Spain > last week as well) whenever looking

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

sent from a phone > On 18 Mar 2017, at 21:40, Sandor Seres wrote: > > In another style, typical land related names are on the water like here > http://osm.org/go/0Tt1PZIt-?layers=T . seems like either a bad import or localities on the sea, e.g. here:

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

To be fair, "the local community" in this case is probably mostly me and my interpretation of the Swedish community's reaction when someone tried to remove Corine imagery rather carelessly (introduced a lot of new errors) a couple of years ago. It's too bad that we're talking about a region when

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

Sandor, if I understand you correctly your basic message is "let's try and improve osm2pgsql's polygon interpretation rules instead of fixing the data", or at least "while we wait for the data fixing to be completed". I think this is not a good idea because, as you remark yourself, those

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons, some notes

There has been some discussion on the HOT mailing list that makes things a bit clearer. OSM in general has a fair number of things that have been added in a less than ideal way. It can be difficult to correct some things as we have guidelines or recommended practises as opposed to hard and fast

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

sent from a phone > On 4 Mar 2017, at 16:54, Jochen Topf wrote: > > the old-style > polygons are next and I will create challenges for them, too. great, they're really legacy to get rid of. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 11:03:26AM +, molto...@gmail.com wrote: > You should also look out for MPs with tags on the outer ring but > should actually only be on the realtion. Having the same tags on inner > and outer is a nice heuristic that QA tools detect, but is not the > only way that

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 10:50:41AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > On 4 Mar 2017, at 08:49, Jochen Topf wrote: > > > > Looking at the graphs on http://area.jochentopf.com/stats you can see > > that the number of (multi)polygons is growing steadily, while the number > >

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 4 March 2017 9:50:41 AM GMT+00:00, Martin Koppenhoefer >I want to point out though that " >Errors: Inner rings with same tags as outer rings" > >are not necessarily errors, and should not be "fixed" unless you know >very well the situation and can tell that there's indeed a >redundancy/data

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

sent from a phone > On 4 Mar 2017, at 08:49, Jochen Topf wrote: > > Looking at the graphs on http://area.jochentopf.com/stats you can see > that the number of (multi)polygons is growing steadily, while the number > of errors has been more or less flat over the last half

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Hi! You all have been very busy fixing my challenges, so here are some more: http://area.jochentopf.com/fixing.html#self-intersecting-polygon-ways I have started to keep an ongoing "blog" where I'll post news and information about the effort to fix the (multi)polygons:

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 05:27:18PM +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 03/03/2017 05:10 PM, m...@rtijn.org wrote: > > Since the ‘self-intersecting’ challenge is now complete I featured the > > ‘Wrong role’ challenge in MapRoulette. Happy fixing! > > Are there plans to make these challenges

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 09:07:37AM -0800, Clifford Snow wrote: > I noticed a number of riverbanks with self-intersecting ways in the PNW > that appear on OSMI. How do I go about creating a challenge to fix them? The challenges I have posted recently are only the beginning. I have more challenges

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Jochen Topf now has technology in place that does this specifically for buildings. Perhaps he can do the same for other types and help you publish? Martijn > On Mar 3, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Clifford Snow wrote: > > Martijn, > I noticed a number of riverbanks with

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Martijn, I noticed a number of riverbanks with self-intersecting ways in the PNW that appear on OSMI. How do I go about creating a challenge to fix them? Clifford On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:10 AM, wrote: > Since the ‘self-intersecting’ challenge is now complete I featured the >

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Hi, Am 03.03.2017 um 17:27 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: > Are there plans to make these challenges permanent or periodically > re-introduce them when a new batch of issues has been prepared? The German speaking countries have a handful of mappers who regularly look for multipolygon errors

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 03/03/2017 05:10 PM, m...@rtijn.org wrote: > Since the ‘self-intersecting’ challenge is now complete I featured the ‘Wrong > role’ challenge in MapRoulette. Happy fixing! Are there plans to make these challenges permanent or periodically re-introduce them when a new batch of issues has been

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Since the ‘self-intersecting’ challenge is now complete I featured the ‘Wrong role’ challenge in MapRoulette. Happy fixing! Martijn > On Feb 25, 2017, at 2:04 AM, Manfred A. Reiter wrote: > > Hi Martijn, > > 2017-02-24 23:35 GMT+01:00

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

I made the challenge ‘Featured’ in MapRoulette so it becomes easier to spot. What a mess in some places I looked at…Please help fix! Martijn > On Feb 22, 2017, at 1:07 AM, Jochen Topf wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 07:44:18PM +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: >> On

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 07:44:18PM +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 02/21/2017 05:40 PM, Jochen Topf wrote: > > Find all challenges and instructions here: > > http://area.jochentopf.com/fixing.html > > My OCD complains about the typo before the challenge links, please do > > sed -i

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 02/21/2017 05:40 PM, Jochen Topf wrote: > Find all challenges and instructions here: > http://area.jochentopf.com/fixing.html My OCD complains about the typo before the challenge links, please do sed -i 's/Got to /Go to/g' fixing.html Also the Maproulette paragraph is no longer accurate now

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 04:20:53PM +0100, Jochen Topf wrote: > There are a lot of (multi)polygons in OSM that are broken in one way or > another. And we have to fix them. While some of the broken ones appear > on the map just fine, some don't appear and some mess up the map. And > some of those

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

2017-02-18 16:26 GMT+02:00 Dave F wrote: > Why do you believe this to be a problem? It may be pointless, but not an > error. As I pointed out there is no problem with geometry. So yes, it is not an error. But import(?) with lots of errors in ETL or source data. -- Tomas

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Hi Why do you believe this to be a problem? It may be pointless, but not an error. I need to point out none of these given examples are multi-polygons. DaveF On 18/02/2017 11:37, Tomas Straupis wrote: Another interesting example are polygons like this:

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 2017-02-18 12:37, Tomas Straupis wrote: Another interesting example are polygons like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/400182030 Polygon geometry is fine here, but it has one pointless node close to one of the nodes. Pointless because it does not influence the final geometry of the

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Another interesting example are polygons like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/400182030 Polygon geometry is fine here, but it has one pointless node close to one of the nodes. Pointless because it does not influence the final geometry of the polygon. And if you look around there

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:26:42AM +, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 18/02/2017 10:15, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > > >After Europe was fixed in <24h it seems i started to wade through Africa > >and i am seeing some error class which makes me wonder is somebody did > >some large scale autonomous

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 01:10:13PM +0200, Tomas Straupis wrote: > >> There are literally hundrets of building which have 4 edges as nodes > >> but them beeing connected over cross so that a construct like a > >> butterfly resembles. > > > > Any chance of a link to an example? > > I guess

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

>> There are literally hundrets of building which have 4 edges as nodes >> but them beeing connected over cross so that a construct like a >> butterfly resembles. > > Any chance of a link to an example? I guess Florian ment geometries like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/460032394

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 18/02/2017 10:15, Florian Lohoff wrote: After Europe was fixed in <24h it seems i started to wade through Africa and i am seeing some error class which makes me wonder is somebody did some large scale autonomous Aerial scan for buildings. There are literally hundrets of building which have

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 04:20:53PM +0100, Jochen Topf wrote: > Yesterday I launched several Maproulette challenges that allow you to > easily help with the "cleaning up" effort. Read > http://area.jochentopf.com/fixing.html for more details on those > Maproulette challenges. This is a huge effort

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 18.02.17 08:43, Jochen Topf wrote: On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 07:50:07AM +0100, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote: On 15.02.17 23:51, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: ... we are currently discussing about changing the algorithm that assembles the polygons[1]. The new algorithms will be a lot faster but that comes

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 07:50:07AM +0100, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote: > On 15.02.17 23:51, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: > > ... we are > > currently discussing about changing the algorithm that assembles the > > polygons[1]. The new algorithms will be a lot faster but that comes > > at the price that it is

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 15.02.17 23:51, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: ... we are currently discussing about changing the algorithm that assembles the polygons[1]. The new algorithms will be a lot faster but that comes at the price that it is less tolerant with invalid geometries. A lot of bad geometries that are currently

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Friday 17 February 2017, Jochen Topf wrote: > > Lets not get this thread hijacked by theoretical ideas about how to > detect wooded areas. This thread is about broken multipolygons. I did not mean to hijack this thread, i meant to provide context for the decision on if to keep the imported

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:11:12AM +0100, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Friday 17 February 2017, Andreas Vilén wrote: > > > > We are aware of the Corine import problems and have discussed them > > locally at least in Sweden. Our community is very loose with not much > > activity in mailing lists

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 2/16/2017 2:51 AM, Yves wrote: Is there an example where the community has cleaned up the Corine multi polygons instead of starting from scratch? I've done some Corine cleanup, mainly consisting of deleting obviously wrong data. Where I've remapped it's been faster to delete it and start

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Friday 17 February 2017, Andreas Vilén wrote: > > We are aware of the Corine import problems and have discussed them > locally at least in Sweden. Our community is very loose with not much > activity in mailing lists or other media, but so far consensus has > been not to remove Corine if it's

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Hi there, We are aware of the Corine import problems and have discussed them locally at least in Sweden. Our community is very loose with not much activity in mailing lists or other media, but so far consensus has been not to remove Corine if it's not replaced by improved data. I have done

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

2017-02-16 11:51 GMT+01:00 Yves : > Is there an example where the community has cleaned up the Corine multi > polygons instead of starting from scratch? I have spent some time tidying up some pieces of imported Corine geometry in the past, but I could reuse literally nothing

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Is there an example where the community has cleaned up the Corine multi polygons instead of starting from scratch? Le 16 février 2017 10:53:42 GMT+01:00, Christoph Hormann a écrit : >On Wednesday 15 February 2017, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: >> >> There are some notable holes,

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On Wednesday 15 February 2017, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: > > There are some notable holes, for example in the woods of > Scandinavia. It would be great if they are gone by the time we > switch the software. A general recommendation here to the Scandinavian communities - you might seriously want to

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 16-Feb-17 10:52 AM, Paul Norman wrote: On 2/15/2017 2:51 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: There is a comparison map where you can see the changes: https://osmium.osm2pgsql.paulnorman.ca There are some notable holes, for example in the woods of Scandinavia. It would be great if they are gone by

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

On 2/15/2017 2:51 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: There is a comparison map where you can see the changes: https://osmium.osm2pgsql.paulnorman.ca There are some notable holes, for example in the woods of Scandinavia. It would be great if they are gone by the time we switch the software. Just to

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Hi sarah, i'm doing the missing boundaries task trying to fix as many bad boundary polygons as possible. Working with osm2pgsql too i decided some month ago to disallow osm2pgsql to automatically fix these geometries by adding --exclude-invalid-polygon. In the first days i got a lot of

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixing broken multipolygons

Hi, let me add a bit of motivation to this. For osm2pgsql, the software that process the OSM data for rendering the map on osm.org, we are currently discussing about changing the algorithm that assembles the polygons[1]. The new algorithms will be a lot faster but that comes at the price that it