Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
Andy Allan wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Simon Biber > wrote: > >> Apart from the loss of ID and history, this also affects clients such as >> Mapzen POI Collector. Once a point of interest is no longer a single >> node, Mapzen does not consider it as a point of interest or allow it to >> be edited. It even disappears from the map entirely for several weeks, >> until Mapzen's base layer is re-rendered to show the area. >> >> Does anyone have a good solution for this? > > When I was working on the POI collector roadmap it was always the > intention to interpret "point of interest areas" as well as "point of > interest nodes". I'm not sure if any such areas are being dealt with > yet - the idea was to synthesize a POI in the middle of the area to > let you change the tags, but not change the geometry. We'd need an > update from one of the CloudMade team. > http://developers.cloudmade.com/issues/show/322 -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Giving-everything-a-unique-ID-tp5128984p5142357.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 4 June 2010 00:20, Anthony wrote: > Hmm, on second thought, maybe that's not such a hot idea. There might be > two different stores which are combined into one, and obviously we'd want to > keep both uuids (otherwise they wouldn't be "permanent"). David Dean has suggested Flickr would probably be more interested in building UUIDs than tenants, so this is as good a reason as any to automatically allocate multiple UUIDs based on what the object is tagged with when a UUID is requested. I've also incorporated most of your previous emails suggestions into the wiki page, it might be useful to get a comment from Flickr or Wikipedia about our current thinking, since they are the ones most likely to benefit from this. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
Hi John, John Smith wrote: > It's come up in the past about unique IDs for objects, some people use > OSM IDs for this, however someone has come up with a different way to > do this, make a QR code and stick it to the object and use the QR > codes ID number: > > http://digitalurban.blogspot.com/2010/05/how-to-add-anything-to-internet-of.html > > I wonder how hard it would be to have OSM stickers with unique ID > codes and ask business owners to put them up in their windows? we are doing something like this here in Ethiopia. We assign OSM POIs (IDs) with short names (www.addismap.com/name). We have prepared stickers and write with a perma marker the name part. No QR code anyways, as nobody would have the sufficient mobile phones to decode that stuff. Greetings from Addis Ababa, Alexander www.addismap.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 4 June 2010 00:58, Anthony wrote: > Yes. The way I see it, the "permanent object"/"moral entity" would be > whatever you describe in the text. So if you put in the text "the Texas > School Book Depository", the uuid should move when the book depository > moves. If you put in the text "the building where Oswald shot Kennedy", the > uuid shouldn't move when the book depository moves. I'd think in most cases > you'd choose the former rather than the latter, but in some cases you might > really want to link to the latter (such as the example given). Actually that's a better example than the one I thought up, I'll add it to the wiki page. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > On 3 June 2010 15:38, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Pieren wrote: >> So is the permanent object the node? Is the permanent object the POI? >> What if the POI moves? If I tag the public library as a POI node, then >> do a building trace, that's one POI- but what if the library moves (as >> my local library is planning on doing). Does that permanent object >> move with the library, or does it stay with the building? >> >> > The idea behind John's idea is that the permanent UUID is linked to your > library. So if your library moves, you need to move the UUID tags to the new > building. It is meant to be associated with the "moral" entity like a > library, a shop, etc... "Moral entity" might not be the best term but it is > close, I think. > Yes. The way I see it, the "permanent object"/"moral entity" would be whatever you describe in the text. So if you put in the text "the Texas School Book Depository", the uuid should move when the book depository moves. If you put in the text "the building where Oswald shot Kennedy", the uuid shouldn't move when the book depository moves. I'd think in most cases you'd choose the former rather than the latter, but in some cases you might really want to link to the latter (such as the example given). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 15:38, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Pieren wrote: > > > > > What external applications need from OSM is a persistent ID for > persistent > > objects. If a business moves, then use a yellow page application to find > the > > new address. > > I'm sorry to jump into this thread from hell, but you've touched on a > question that's been unclear to me from the beginning of this > discussion, which is "What does an permanent object mean?" > > A common thing for me to do as a mapper is manually collect POIs while > walking, upload them, and then later, using sources like imagry, get > rid of my nodes and replace them with ways (eg buildings). > > So is the permanent object the node? Is the permanent object the POI? > What if the POI moves? If I tag the public library as a POI node, then > do a building trace, that's one POI- but what if the library moves (as > my local library is planning on doing). Does that permanent object > move with the library, or does it stay with the building? > > The idea behind John's idea is that the permanent UUID is linked to your library. So if your library moves, you need to move the UUID tags to the new building. It is meant to be associated with the "moral" entity like a library, a shop, etc... "Moral entity" might not be the best term but it is close, I think. Emilie Laffray ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 4 June 2010 00:38, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > I'm sorry to jump into this thread from hell, but you've touched on a > question that's been unclear to me from the beginning of this > discussion, which is "What does an permanent object mean?" There are no permanent objects in OSM, some just last longer than others. > So is the permanent object the node? Is the permanent object the POI? > What if the POI moves? If I tag the public library as a POI node, then > do a building trace, that's one POI- but what if the library moves (as > my local library is planning on doing). Does that permanent object > move with the library, or does it stay with the building? That ended up the point of this thread, figuring a method to tag any object, doesn't matter if it's a node or a way or an area or a relation, and have a way to refer to that object, even if that object changes from being a node to being an area. The actual object is less important, in this context, than the unique ID number keeping tracking of it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Pieren wrote: > > What external applications need from OSM is a persistent ID for persistent > objects. If a business moves, then use a yellow page application to find the > new address. I'm sorry to jump into this thread from hell, but you've touched on a question that's been unclear to me from the beginning of this discussion, which is "What does an permanent object mean?" A common thing for me to do as a mapper is manually collect POIs while walking, upload them, and then later, using sources like imagry, get rid of my nodes and replace them with ways (eg buildings). So is the permanent object the node? Is the permanent object the POI? What if the POI moves? If I tag the public library as a POI node, then do a building trace, that's one POI- but what if the library moves (as my local library is planning on doing). Does that permanent object move with the library, or does it stay with the building? - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 4 June 2010 00:20, Anthony wrote: > Hmm, on second thought, maybe that's not such a hot idea. There might be > two different stores which are combined into one, and obviously we'd want to > keep both uuids (otherwise they wouldn't be "permanent"). This may require multiple relations against a single node or area otherwise you won't know which uuid would apply to which store. > Still, I'd prefer uuid=1;2;3 to uuid:*=*. The benefit of sub-tagging instead of tag stuffing is it is more efficient for things to parse. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
To extend Anthony's idea slightly further it might be useful to create a bot script that if you want a UUID for an object in the OSM DB, it can tag the object with a new UUID and return that, or simply return the any existing UUIDs, this would take care of things like Flickr/osmfuel/wikipedia needing to find out the UUID if they get a node/way/relation ID. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 4 June 2010 00:07, Anthony wrote: > *The node/way/relation gets tagged with uuid=*, where * is generated using > an algorithm expected to create a universally unique id (I'll let someone > more expert determine how, but I was thinking some sort of hash on the xml > of the feature itself plus the time). If a lat/lon pair is created then a > new node is created with that uuid. This is why I included links to RFC 4122, this already covers generating UUIDs in a standard way and that way we avoid trying to reinvent the wheel, plus there is already UUID libraries. > *A wiki page is set up where http://domain/wiki/UUID has text, links, and a > slippy map. The slippy map highlights the element which has the UUID. The > text is meant to be brief - only enough to uniquely identify the "thing" > (perhaps the description text could even be duplicated in a uuid_description > tag). Links would be used for the actual interesting data about the > "thing". This wiki page could also contain a list of existing references IDs from import sources, that way if you know the source and the ID from the source you can find the OSM UUID. > Please note that I've abandoned the functionality of having multiple uuids > on a single element (e.g. uuid:building and uuid:shop). I felt that this > overcomplicates things from the standpoint of someone clicking on "make > permanent link" - they shouldn't have to know anything about the internal I disagree, lets call shop and building UUID tag types, when you want to create a unique ID and only one of these UUID tag types exists it simply gets added as uuid=* or uuid:=*, alternatively if there is multiple a dialog could simply ask which UUID tag type they wish to add, similar to other JOSM preset dialogs. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Anthony wrote: > Please note that I've abandoned the functionality of having multiple uuids > on a single element (e.g. uuid:building and uuid:shop). > Hmm, on second thought, maybe that's not such a hot idea. There might be two different stores which are combined into one, and obviously we'd want to keep both uuids (otherwise they wouldn't be "permanent"). Still, I'd prefer uuid=1;2;3 to uuid:*=*. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 2:26 AM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com < jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi, > here is a humble suggestion, instead of giving *everything* unique id, > we might focus on making some form of permalink that is usable upon > request. Like for wikipedia articles etc, that we can link to and be > relatively sure that the link will still be there. Some form of watch > tool that would inform the user that the permalink he created is > broken. > It would be easier to maintain a list of "don't break me" links than > to rework the whole system. > mike > Okay, here's a plan. I took some of the detail from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/UUID but adapted it a bit: *From the URL for any node/way/relation (or lat/lon pair) one can click on a button "make permanent link". *The node/way/relation gets tagged with uuid=*, where * is generated using an algorithm expected to create a universally unique id (I'll let someone more expert determine how, but I was thinking some sort of hash on the xml of the feature itself plus the time). If a lat/lon pair is created then a new node is created with that uuid. *A wiki page is set up where http://domain/wiki/UUID has text, links, and a slippy map. The slippy map highlights the element which has the UUID. The text is meant to be brief - only enough to uniquely identify the "thing" (perhaps the description text could even be duplicated in a uuid_description tag). Links would be used for the actual interesting data about the "thing". *If more than one element points to the same UUID, this is an error - use a relation if you want to do this. *Mappers are encouraged to check http://domain/wiki/UUID before deleting or repurposing nodes/ways/relations. *A bot goes through regularly checking for additions, deletions, drastic changes, duplicate UUIDs, etc., and adds them to a list for people to manually check/fix. *All external sources are encouraged to point to UUIDs, not to the element id. Please note that I've abandoned the functionality of having multiple uuids on a single element (e.g. uuid:building and uuid:shop). I felt that this overcomplicates things from the standpoint of someone clicking on "make permanent link" - they shouldn't have to know anything about the internal workings of OSM and I want to maintain the flexibility to tag *anything*, not just a predetermined list of things. I suppose this could be allowed for advanced users who want to do things by hand, but it's not in this plan. Anthony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 19:39, Pieren wrote: > What external applications need from OSM is a persistent ID for persistent > objects. If a business moves, then use a yellow page application to find the > new address. Businesses are only one application, I'm not sure what 3rd party sites are using OSM IDs but Flickr and osmfuel.org are 2 that I know of and every time some new use for OSM IDs occur people always seem to comment about why it's such a bad idea to use OSM IDs, I'm trying to come up with a better suggestion. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:07 AM, John Smith wrote: > > This doesn't cover the case of where a business moves... > > > What external applications need from OSM is a persistent ID for persistent objects. If a business moves, then use a yellow page application to find the new address. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Simon Biber wrote: > Apart from the loss of ID and history, this also affects clients such as > Mapzen POI Collector. Once a point of interest is no longer a single node, > Mapzen does not consider it as a point of interest or allow it to be edited. > It even disappears from the map entirely for several weeks, until Mapzen's > base layer is re-rendered to show the area. > > Does anyone have a good solution for this? When I was working on the POI collector roadmap it was always the intention to interpret "point of interest areas" as well as "point of interest nodes". I'm not sure if any such areas are being dealt with yet - the idea was to synthesize a POI in the middle of the area to let you change the tags, but not change the geometry. We'd need an update from one of the CloudMade team. Feel free to keep converting nodes into areas when you feel it's appropriate. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 17:56, Pieren wrote: > At the end, you just translate a lat/lon + tag to a number when you can > simply request a tag by its lat/lon to an appropriate api. This doesn't cover the case of where a business moves... > The unique ID already exists, it's the osm_id. Why should we recreate the > wheel ? But it's true that the ID is not permanent and cannot really be You answered your own question... > trusted. URL's in Wikipedia have the same issue. What about trying to > improve the persistence of the ID by using a similar mechanism : when an > editor sees that a node has been replaced by another node or polygon "with > the same meaning (or set of tags)", it could insert a kind of "#REDIRECT" > into the removed object redirecting to the new osm_id This doesn't work because not every object needs a unique ID, some objects need multiple unique IDs and some objects need to share the same unique ID, or create a relation and use the unique ID on the relation, although this could be another method to tag similar/same objects without needing to use a relation. Redirecting won't be effective in the example I listed on the wiki page of a building having a unique ID and a tenant having a unique ID and the tenant moving to a new building, the unique ID can follow the tenant but not effect the existing building information like address. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:19 AM, John Smith wrote: > On 3 June 2010 16:26, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com > wrote: > > Hi, > > here is a humble suggestion, instead of giving *everything* unique id, > > I didn't actually mean everything in that sense, for example the nodes > on a road don't all need unique IDs nor should they get them, but at > the same time a single node might need 2 unique IDs, one for the > building and one for the business occupying the building. > > At the end, you just translate a lat/lon + tag to a number when you can simply request a tag by its lat/lon to an appropriate api. The unique ID already exists, it's the osm_id. Why should we recreate the wheel ? But it's true that the ID is not permanent and cannot really be trusted. URL's in Wikipedia have the same issue. What about trying to improve the persistence of the ID by using a similar mechanism : when an editor sees that a node has been replaced by another node or polygon "with the same meaning (or set of tags)", it could insert a kind of "#REDIRECT" into the removed object redirecting to the new osm_id Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 16:26, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: > Hi, > here is a humble suggestion, instead of giving *everything* unique id, I didn't actually mean everything in that sense, for example the nodes on a road don't all need unique IDs nor should they get them, but at the same time a single node might need 2 unique IDs, one for the building and one for the business occupying the building. In any case I think I mixed up 2 issues in the one email, that is assigning objects unique IDs and then distributing those unique IDs on stickers as a kind of PR/advertising exercise. To cover the first issue about using/assigning unique IDs against OSM objects, I've written a wiki page with some initial thoughts on the subject: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/UUID As for promotion, I'll leave that till UUIDs are sorted. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
Hi, here is a humble suggestion, instead of giving *everything* unique id, we might focus on making some form of permalink that is usable upon request. Like for wikipedia articles etc, that we can link to and be relatively sure that the link will still be there. Some form of watch tool that would inform the user that the permalink he created is broken. It would be easier to maintain a list of "don't break me" links than to rework the whole system. mike On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:19 AM, John Smith wrote: > On 3 June 2010 16:07, Maarten Deen wrote: >> Keep the node (not because of the ID, but because of the POI meaning) and >> add the area as a non-named area with only tags to indicate usage. >> Optionally add them all in a relation. >> That way you keep the POI for POI collectors, you can use the POI to >> position the name on the map and still have the site visible as an area on >> the map. >> >> Other solution: have POI collectors rewrite their code to consider areas >> too (and use the average location of all points in the area as the POI >> location). >> >> I must say I have not always mapped according to the first rule myself. >> But IMHO this is a point that needs discussing, for the POI collector's >> sake. > > Even if you did map for the POI collectors they still need to take > into account POIs added as areas by others, so it seems like poor > coding not to deal with POIs as areas in any case. > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 16:07, Maarten Deen wrote: > Keep the node (not because of the ID, but because of the POI meaning) and > add the area as a non-named area with only tags to indicate usage. > Optionally add them all in a relation. > That way you keep the POI for POI collectors, you can use the POI to > position the name on the map and still have the site visible as an area on > the map. > > Other solution: have POI collectors rewrite their code to consider areas > too (and use the average location of all points in the area as the POI > location). > > I must say I have not always mapped according to the first rule myself. > But IMHO this is a point that needs discussing, for the POI collector's > sake. Even if you did map for the POI collectors they still need to take into account POIs added as areas by others, so it seems like poor coding not to deal with POIs as areas in any case. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:52:25 -0700 (PDT), Simon Biber wrote: > Gregory wrote: >> If I'm mapping I try and keep nodes intact and edit the tagging >> to preserve the ID and history, but there are cases where this >> can't happen. > > Another example where ID and history are lost is when we change items from > single nodes to areas, as we get higher resolution photo maps (like > NearMap) or more accurate GPS / inertial positioning devices. Recently I > have been deleting nodes and recreating them as areas for playgrounds, > tennis courts, swimming pools, etc. > > Apart from the loss of ID and history, this also affects clients such as > Mapzen POI Collector. Once a point of interest is no longer a single node, > Mapzen does not consider it as a point of interest or allow it to be > edited. It even disappears from the map entirely for several weeks, until > Mapzen's base layer is re-rendered to show the area. > > Does anyone have a good solution for this? Keep the node (not because of the ID, but because of the POI meaning) and add the area as a non-named area with only tags to indicate usage. Optionally add them all in a relation. That way you keep the POI for POI collectors, you can use the POI to position the name on the map and still have the site visible as an area on the map. Other solution: have POI collectors rewrite their code to consider areas too (and use the average location of all points in the area as the POI location). I must say I have not always mapped according to the first rule myself. But IMHO this is a point that needs discussing, for the POI collector's sake. Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 12:57, Alan Mintz wrote: > I have no problem with giving things a permid. But seriously, we can't go > around slapping stickers on the physical world. It's called vandalism. I did say "and ask business owners to put them up in their windows" in my first post... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
I have no problem with giving things a permid. But seriously, we can't go around slapping stickers on the physical world. It's called vandalism. -- Alan Mintz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 11:45, wrote: > or which door bell to press, or the phone number, or The phone number can already be added to objects, but at this point in time there is no ID permanence, which would be useful. As an added bonus it would be some free advertising for OSM. > but seriously... there is a limit to the amount of data we should be > placing into the OSM servers. What is that limit exactly? and more to the point who determines it? under what conditions? > I would think that a small 2D barcode with lat/long might suffice for > getting someone there, or providing navigation services to that location. > You are welcome to have alternate ideas. This isn't supposed to be a navigational aide, it's an ID permanence aide, something that can't be done at present with OSM and which can be detrimental for sharing objects from OSM with other 3rd parties, for example the osmfuel.org site uses OSM IDs for fuel locations, but these IDs can change at which point the new ID will need to be found so the information can stay cross referenced. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
> On 3 June 2010 10:04, wrote: >> The 'shortlink' does not describe an object with OSM, it describes a >> location on the planet (akin to a lat/long). > > Yup, exactly, and it doesn't describe a level in the case of a > multilevel building, both above and below ground. > or which door bell to press, or the phone number, or but seriously... there is a limit to the amount of data we should be placing into the OSM servers. I would think that a small 2D barcode with lat/long might suffice for getting someone there, or providing navigation services to that location. You are welcome to have alternate ideas. Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 10:52, Simon Biber wrote: > Does anyone have a good solution for this? That's what this thread is about, printing out stickers that have their own unique ID, then tagging objects with that ID... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 10:24, Gregory wrote: > If you want a QR code, I understand these are usually(always?) just internet > URLs converted into a 2D barcode. For this you can > use http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/125847545 QR codes are 2 dimension matrix that store information, which could be textual information address formats or even URLs. Although we could use URLs that include the ID number. The all we need is a bunch of mobile printers to print these things on demand... :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
Gregory wrote: > If I'm mapping I try and keep nodes intact and edit the tagging > to preserve the ID and history, but there are cases where this > can't happen. Another example where ID and history are lost is when we change items from single nodes to areas, as we get higher resolution photo maps (like NearMap) or more accurate GPS / inertial positioning devices. Recently I have been deleting nodes and recreating them as areas for playgrounds, tennis courts, swimming pools, etc. Apart from the loss of ID and history, this also affects clients such as Mapzen POI Collector. Once a point of interest is no longer a single node, Mapzen does not consider it as a point of interest or allow it to be edited. It even disappears from the map entirely for several weeks, until Mapzen's base layer is re-rendered to show the area. Does anyone have a good solution for this? Regards Simon. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 01:04, wrote: > > > > > The point is people are consistently told OSM IDs shouldn't be > > considered as unique as the object could be deleted/merged/whatever > > and so the previous ID is no longer valid even if the object exists > > with other IDs. > > How can you counter-act this? If I'm mapping I try and keep nodes intact and edit the tagging to preserve the ID and history, but there are cases where this can't happen. For example I know a map that closed and got removed from the map (it looked like it would be converted to houses rather than re opened), but it reopened and I had to add it as a new node. If you want a QR code, I understand these are usually(always?) just internet URLs converted into a 2D barcode. For this you can use http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/125847545 -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 3 June 2010 10:04, wrote: > The 'shortlink' does not describe an object with OSM, it describes a > location on the planet (akin to a lat/long). Yup, exactly, and it doesn't describe a level in the case of a multilevel building, both above and below ground. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
> On 3 June 2010 05:22, wrote: >> What would be the purpose of (say) a 2D barcode displayed in the window? >> I >> mean, you're all ready there > > The purpose is to give things a unique ID, the QR code could embed a > very unique ID and then that ID can be used to identify that location > in OSM, rather than trying to use OSM object IDs which may change. > >> What 'we' could do is provide a auto-magic image/QR-Code/DataMatrix >> containing a 'short code URL' to a map of the location displayed in >> OpenStreetMap on the 'data' page for that node. > > The point is people are consistently told OSM IDs shouldn't be > considered as unique as the object could be deleted/merged/whatever > and so the previous ID is no longer valid even if the object exists > with other IDs. > The 'shortlink' does not describe an object with OSM, it describes a location on the planet (akin to a lat/long). ie: http://osm.org/go/0EEQCvG5-?m http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shortlink Cheers, Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
On 2 June 2010 13:16, Stefan de Konink wrote: > You stole my id ;) I have used osm stickers + ids for that. Any suggestions on mass producing them? > A photo is on the wiki ;) URL? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Giving everything a unique ID
You stole my id ;) I have used osm stickers + ids for that. A photo is on the wiki ;) Stefan Op 2 jun 2010 om 04:29 heeft John Smith het volgende geschreven:\ > It's come up in the past about unique IDs for objects, some people use > OSM IDs for this, however someone has come up with a different way to > do this, make a QR code and stick it to the object and use the QR > codes ID number: > > http://digitalurban.blogspot.com/2010/05/how-to-add-anything-to-internet-of.html > > I wonder how hard it would be to have OSM stickers with unique ID > codes and ask business owners to put them up in their windows? > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
