Is it possible to post cc talk-us-nps on these responses as well? Thanks! mamata
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Thomas Colson <[email protected]>wrote: > That works. I'll add that to my Sunday-list. Wasn't aware that > official_name > tag worked for ways as well. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Remillard [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 4:07 PM > To: Thomas Colson > Cc: [email protected]; Imports US > Subject: Re: [Imports-us] [Talk-us-nps] National Park Service Import > Feedback > > Hi, > > The name wiki seems clear. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:official_name > > The "official_name" name should be used for the full E911 name. When you > render the NPS tiles, use the official_name tag first. Also import the > official name as "name". You don't have the actual signage in your > database, > it is the best you can do. If an OSM'er goes camping, and fixes name to > match the actual sign, everything is still correct per OSM policy and your > NPS tiles don't break since you don't care about what the name tag says. > Since NPS is the authoritative source for the "offical_name", it would be > incorrect to change it from what you imported. > > Thanks > Jason. > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Colson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > We're required to publish official road names on all maps and data as > > assigned by Federal Highways and approved by the park(s) superintendent. > > Most parks have several camp grounds. Few, if any, roads in most parks > > are signed in keeping with "like the wilderness" principle, and > > campground loops are only signed such as "B 20-30 Left, B 31-40 Right" > > referring to campsite numbers. Nor are many, if any, "Verifiable from > > Aerial Imagery". We use a combination of Mapping and Survey-grade GPS > > and various versions of leaf-off > > .5 m orthophoto to grab centerlines. For example, we have Smokemont > > Campground Road A, Elkmont Campground Road A, Cades Cove Campground > > Road A, etc. The official names are what we synchronize on with > > surrounding E911 jurisdictions, what first responders use, and what we > > use for Incident Command (see the other post to the list about the > > Colorado fire). And, yes, I do plan on campsite numbers, some day > (another > OSM project, perhaps). > > > > If that runs afoul of OSM road naming convention, I don't have an > > alternative. Road naming, and other attributes (closed, access,etc...) > > is a VERY controversial issue for this park, and I'm sure others, and > > receives A LOT of attention (and complaints), based on what many > > Location Based Service Providers "render" on a web site or GPS. We're > > hoping that with OSM data we can achieve a good, accurate, and > > authentic public-domain source of park navigation data. > > > > > > I'm heading out of town for the weekend, plan on researching/fixing > > that way, building, and TIGER tag issue when I get back. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason Remillard [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 1:29 PM > > To: Akella, Mamata > > Cc: [email protected]; Imports US > > Subject: Re: [Talk-us-nps] [Imports-us] National Park Service Import > > Feedback > > > > Hi Mamata, Thomas > > > > I understand that the nps:verified tag is a very complicated situation. > > Ignoring the inter-organizational angles, It seem like you should be > > pretty serious about getting your access tags nailed. > > > > "Elkmont campground" is prefixed on all of the road names. I bet that > > the signs on the campground don't include those names. They probably > > just read "Road A", "Road B", etc. Generally we want the map to match > > what the signs say on the ground. If I am correct about the signs, I > > suggest, making the "Elkmont campground" node, an area around the > > entire site, then dropping the "Elkmont campground" prefex from your road > names. > > > > The JOSM validation can miss things if you don't already have the > > current data loaded in. After you do the upload, you should shut down > > JOSM (at least delete the data layer), then re-download the entire > > area, and run the validator again. > > > > Your current amenity tagging might be the best you can do with the > > current software. Given that you are high profile customer of Mapbox, > > perhaps you could give them a friendly nudge to support semicolon > > amenity's in the rendering engine so that you can do the right thing in > the OSM data. > > Honestly, it is not a big deal. > > > > You need to use OSM's definition of highway=service. Again, this not a > > big deal. > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway%3Dservice > > > > The three things I would focus on would be the access tag, the double > > buildings, and the road names. The rest of the issues are just picky > > details... > > > > Thanks > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Akella, Mamata > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Jason, > >> > >> Mamata Akella here. Thank you so much for the detailed guidelines! > >> This is exactly the type of information that we're looking for and we > >> will incorporate it into our workflows. Specifically the tagging of > >> buildings, combining multiple features, and the removal of TIGER tags. > >> > >> We are still working through the nps:verified=yes tag. I think you > >> bring up a really interesting point about making minor edits to data > >> that we've tagged as verified. > >> > >> Let's keep this discussion going for sure! > >> > >> mamata > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Jason Remillard > >> <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> The NPS state of the map talk from this weekend was very interesting! > >>> I hope you are successful moving over NPS tiles to OSM. > >>> > >>> It reminded me of your import email from several weeks ago, I wanted > >>> to give you some feedback on your actual imported data! > >>> > >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.65589&lon=-83.58185&zoom=16&lay > >>> e > >>> rs=M > >>> > >>> - If you have multiple amenities on a single building, separate them > >>> with semicolons. Not sure if that will give mapbox issues, but it is > >>> the "right" thing to do as far as OSM data. I don't think it should > >>> be on the building node, unless you are tagging an exit/entrance of > >>> the building. > >>> > >>> - All of the buildings in this area were double imported. Be sure to > >>> run the JOSM validator over your changes before uploading. > >>> > >>> - There is an outdoor theater on the north west of the bounding box. > >>> It is tagged as 4 buildings. I would make an area that encompasses > >>> all of the buildings, and but the amenity and name tag on that, > >>> rather than tagging each roof section of the theater. Perhaps, > >>> change the building=yes, to building=roof. > >>> > >>> - There is a "Elkmont-Elkmont #2 Cemetery Access Road" road. It has > >>> some tiger tags, but it looks like you adjusted the geometry of the > >>> road to match your NPS data. This is fine, but its not really tiger > >>> data now. I would suggest taking the three tiger tags out. > >>> > >>> - The nps:verified tag. I don't really understand what this means. > >>> Perhaps a combination of a source= tag, and and access tag might > >>> allow you to restrict what is shown on the official online nps maps > >>> to areas that you want the public to stay on. We have a *lot* of > >>> established tags already, I think we should be able to express your > >>> intention with nps:verified with our existing tags. Also, more > >>> importantly, what does that mean to people that are mapping inside > >>> of the parks that are not employees of the NPS. Lets says I fix the > >>> small problems I just pointed out. Do I delete nps:verified because > >>> somebody outside of nps touched the data? I am sure the imported nps > >>> is not perfect. What are mappers supposed to do if they find a > >>> missing trail, or road, etc as far as the nps:verified tag? I assume > >>> you do want these improvements from the community in your tiles. > >>> > >>> - Way 2316586510, should probably be a service road. > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Jason. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Imports-us mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-us-nps mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us-nps > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Imports-us mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us-nps mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us-nps >
_______________________________________________ Imports-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
