Morning all,
On 17/11/2020 15:32, Mark Goodge wrote:
what we have is what, from a mapping perspective, is a single road
(Glazebury Way), but that comprises multiple OSM ways. So it's not
unreasonable to add the UPRN to all the ways which make up the road.
However, in this case I think I am talking bollocks. Although the OSM
mapper has assigned UPRN 10071171668 to Glazebrook Way, the OS
OpenUPRN OpenUSRN and OpenMap lookups link it to Gairloch Close. If we
look at Gairloch Close (USRN 3230053) on my USRN map:
Owning up, that mapper is me! <blush>
Just as Rob N added U*RN to his portfolio of useful visualisation tools,
I noticed that adding UPRN to building=* gave location-checked green
circles, adding UPRN to highway=* didn't seem to.
As an experiment, I added the same ID to both ref:GB:usrn and
ref:GB:uprn tags and promptly forgot about the double tagging.
Jez let me know in a changeset discussion here, and the errant tag removed:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90968241
So, if there's any talking bollocks here - it's been uttered by me on
home turf!
I've removed the experimental double-tagging, and attempted to create a
basic Overpass Turbo query to look for (what could be) incorrect values:
---cut here---
[out:json][timeout:25];
// gather results
(
// node or way double tagged
node["ref:GB:usrn"]["ref:GB:uprn"]({{bbox}});
way["ref:GB:usrn"]["ref:GB:uprn"]({{bbox}});
// highway with Property
way["ref:GB:uprn"]["highway"]({{bbox}});
// building with Street
node["ref:GB:usrn"]["building"]({{bbox}});
way["ref:GB:usrn"]["building"]({{bbox}});
);
// print results
out body;
>;
out skel qt;
---cut here---
And now down the rabbit hole...
there's a single linked UPRN that appears to be on Glazebury Way, or
at least the intersection of Glazebury Way and Gairloch Close, rather
than one of the properties on Gairloch Close. Follow that link, and
it's UPRN 10071171668:
https://uprn.uk/10071171668
Now, there's nothing more we can discover from the maps and lookups,
given that the OS open data doesn't tell us precisely what it is and
the maps aren't sufficiently high-resolution. But if we cheat a bit
and go to the location on Google Maps, then switch into street view:
https://goo.gl/maps/ojwFAP21D4HkUvX77
I have a strong hunch that UPRN 10071171668 is actually a subsurface
property (eg, a utilities conduit) accessed via that manhole cover.
Now that's a whole level of complexity which I wasn't previously aware
of. If the data set includes data for ALL entity types (e.g. not just
buildings, streets and the odd post box), then my assumption that a U*RN
in the middle of a highway which looks like a logical centre point for a
way segment could be incorrect.
Looking out of my window (I did say this is home turf...) there is a
foul drain cover at the intersection of Glazebury/ Gisburn, and likely
one at Glazebury/ Gisburn (it's currently chucking it down here, so not
keen to check immediately).
Building UPRN tags appear to be more clear-cut, with the U*SN location
node around the centre of a building way.
As we all learn more about the data, perhaps I (and others?) may have
been to quick to add USRN tags as they first became available?
As several of you appear to have additional sources to validate USRN,
could you offer any suggestions to alter these specific
highway=residential please?
James
--
James Derrick
li...@jamesderrick.org, Cramlington, England
I wouldn't be a volunteer if you paid me...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/James%20Derrick
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
