Another update: I've added checks into the application to make sure that addresses are between 5 and 100 meters from the street centerline, and that each address is at least 4 meters from another address. The source code located here <https://github.com/saiarcot895/osm-fulton-address/tree/geos-library> has been updated. Note that the code with the distance checks is in the *geos-library branch*, not the master branch. I've updated the file here <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30vrP6AZTFyYldqT0hJaVVCdGc/edit?usp=sharing> to show a sample output.
Saikrishna Arcot On 01/09/2014 11:54 AM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: > (In case my previous message doesn't go through) > > For the record, I took a quick look at the converted data (after > processing and all) in JOSM, and the address data seems fairly > accurate (at least in midtown Atlanta). There are a few points that > are half-a-house over and some building that have two points, but > mostly all points seem to be located correctly. > > A slightly bigger issue I'm seeing is POIs and buildings that have an > addr:housenumber, but no addr:street, which makes it difficult to > determine what street the building is on and to detect that as an > existing address. In the Atlanta region, there are a few > <http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Zd> that can probably be manually > handled. Currently, I'm ignoring anything that has an addr:housenumber > but no addr:street, but this will cause some duplicate data. > > As a status update, I can generate a sample OsmChange file after > running it through my application, but it does very few checks to see > if the address is located at a reasonable location. I've uploaded a > sample file for review so far here > <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30vrP6AZTFyYldqT0hJaVVCdGc/edit>. > _Note that addr:city is missing._ _/ > /_ > I'll get in touch with the Fulton County GIS to see if they can allow > the building footprint data to be used in OSM. However, I don't see > how the tax parcel data can help in OSM. > Saikrishna Arcot > On 01/09/2014 11:49 AM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: >> For the record, I took a quick look at the converted data (after >> processing and all) in JOSM, and the address data seems fairly >> accurate (at least in midtown Atlanta). There are a few points that >> are half-a-house over and some building that have two points, but >> mostly all points seem to be located correctly. >> >> A slightly bigger issue I'm seeing is POIs and buildings that have an >> addr:housenumber, but no addr:street, which makes it difficult to >> determine what street the building is on and to detect that as an >> existing address. In the Atlanta region, there are a few >> <http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Zd> that can probably be manually >> handled. Currently, I'm ignoring anything that has an >> addr:housenumber but no addr:street, but this will cause some >> duplicate data. >> >> As a status update, I can generate a sample OsmChange file after >> running it through my application, but it does very few checks to see >> if the address is located at a reasonable location. I've attached a >> sample file for review so far. _Note that addr:city is missing._ _/ >> /_ >> I'll get in touch with the Fulton County GIS to see if they can allow >> the building footprint data to be used in OSM. However, I don't see >> how the tax parcel data can help in OSM. >> /Saikrishna Arcot/ >> On 01/09/2014 11:08 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Clifford Snow >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I agree with Martijn. Addresses add real value to OSM. With an >>> address node, routing works better, adding POI information is >>> easier, and it aids disaster recovery work. I'll admit, building >>> outlines look nice and alone they aid mappers adding POIs and >>> also can be used in disaster recovery work. So each adds value. >>> >>> >>> >>> About the disaster recovery work. I had a conversation with a >>> CERT member last week. He was frustrated using address >>> interpolation to plan for response efforts. He would love to see >>> address nodes added. >>> >>> >>> Let's not confuse addresses as raw nodes with no addresses. >>> >>> That's a bit like me saying a healthy meal is better than junk food, >>> and the response being that junk food is better than no food. It's >>> not what I'm saying. >>> >>> The issues with address points are: >>> >>> 1. They're often in the wrong places. You just don't know it until >>> you have building footprints to compare it to. >>> >>> 2. There's not a whole lot of data about addresses being updated >>> >>> 3. (as was brought up in the NYC building point discussion) There's >>> no code that I'm aware of that correctly parses address points >>> inside building polyogons in such a way that non-addressed POIs get >>> the address attributes. >>> >>> 4. If geolocation is the issue (which it seems to be), then we could >>> feed that data to the geolocator directly, rather than placing it in >>> OSM. >>> >>> - Serge >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Imports mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports >> >
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
