Hi Stellamaris,
Yes, we all understand that but best practice is NOT to name an object with descriptive labels such as bore hole, well etc. Look at the ones in the west of Uganda with multiple water related tags and names other than bore hole etc https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8635407988 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8635407629 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8635407959 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8635409297 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8635407338 Its clear that many existing points don’t follow best practice but with an import its possible to get more complete and exact tagging prior to import. That’s what the mail list discussion is about. Cheers – Phil From: Stellamaris Nakacwa <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 7 November 2022 2:03 PM To: Phil Wyatt <[email protected]> Cc: Mike Thompson <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Imports] UPLOADING U-WIMP project data to osm Hi Phil, This is part of the dataset that we used. I am highlighting that the significant tag of the dataset is amenity = water_point. However, for completeness, attributes including the name of the water point are essential You may be able to see that white your skill through the overpass query you have shared. Does that make sense? Stellamaris On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 9:37 PM Phil Wyatt <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Hi Stellamaris, Have a look at existing water points and you can see the combination of tags that can/could be used. You will also see how some of the points have names and some don’t. Be aware that some existing records may also no longer be ‘best practice’ (ie source on each object rather than on the changeset). https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1nt0 HOT Uganda may also be able to offer advice from their past experience https://www.hotosm.org/where-we-work/uganda/ Cheers - Phil From: Stellamaris Nakacwa <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, 7 November 2022 1:15 PM To: Mike Thompson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Cc: Phil Wyatt <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Imports] UPLOADING U-WIMP project data to osm So, how do we label the results of our results that gave us the significance of this tag sequence? I am really curious and I would love to know how best we can work around it. Thank you! Stellamaris On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 8:36 PM Mike Thompson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 6:19 PM Stellamaris Nakacwa <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Hello Phil, We were able to make a thorough assessment of the key/value pair of all water tags, based on granularity, compliance, consistency and completeness (temporal and spatial coverage) and what is written in my osm wiki is the most significant outcome of the assessment. --a snippet is attached too. Also, I personally believe that uploading data to osm (esp. for LIC) should not just be for the sake of uploads but to make real data contributions that those governing institutions and interested parties can rely on to make desired planning progress. In verbatim, I believe that all infrastructure is man-made. That is why for springs, we only mapped ones that have been well-built and cared for. Regardless if a spring is tagged natural=spring, the name=* tag is only for the name of the feature, not for descriptive information. Also, the name tag is not a way to cause the renderer to create a desired label that would otherwise not appear, that is tagging for the renderer. However, regarding springs, in my opinion, springs are inherently natural. If there is human made infrastructure associated with the spring, separate tags should be found for that infrastructure, or perhaps it should be mapped separately. Take the example of a lake where humans have extensively modified the shoreline, we still tag the lake as natural=water. Mike
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
