Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[Phil Wyatt]

I agree – plenty of other services doing this much better – suspect it would 
only clutter up OSM and be neglected pretty quickly

 

arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?url=https://services9.arcgis.com/ZFlIzBMHgtgl0EYj/ArcGIS/rest/services/NSW_Bushfire_Burnt_Areas_2019_and_2020/FeatureServer/0&source=sd

 

 

Cheers - Phil

From: Nathanael Coyne  
Sent: Tuesday, 28 January 2020 9:56 AM
To: adam steer 
Cc: OSM Australian Talk List 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

 

It'd be like trying to tag plots in landuse=forest as felled or mature. While 
it'd be interesting it would quickly become unreliable and reduce the quality 
of data.

 

So while I would love to have burnt areas mapped in OSM I just think it's not 
worth trying.

 

Nathanael Coyne

 

 

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 09:44, adam steer mailto:adam.d.st...@gmail.com> > wrote:

I’d  personally avoid tagging areas as burnt - they’re temporary and as per 
advice from Andrew maybe should be left tagged as their long term state.

 

Looking around where I am (Benambra and north) there are already a lot of 
overlapping/duplicated/whats this for polygons relating to land cover… it’d be 
great to avoid adding more.

 

I guess if people want to add burned areas, my only suggestion is that whoever 
does so takes it upon themselves to return and update things later…

 

Regards,

 

Adam

 

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org  
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[Nathanael Coyne]

It'd be like trying to tag plots in landuse=forest as felled or mature.
While it'd be interesting it would quickly become unreliable and reduce the
quality of data.

So while I would love to have burnt areas mapped in OSM I just think it's
not worth trying.

Nathanael Coyne


On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 09:44, adam steer  wrote:

> I’d  personally avoid tagging areas as burnt - they’re temporary and as
> per advice from Andrew maybe should be left tagged as their long term state.
>
> Looking around where I am (Benambra and north) there are already a lot of
> overlapping/duplicated/whats this for polygons relating to land cover… it’d
> be great to avoid adding more.
>
> I guess if people want to add burned areas, my only suggestion is that
> whoever does so takes it upon themselves to return and update things later…
>
> Regards,
>
> Adam
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[adam steer]

I’d  personally avoid tagging areas as burnt - they’re temporary and as per
advice from Andrew maybe should be left tagged as their long term state.

Looking around where I am (Benambra and north) there are already a lot of
overlapping/duplicated/whats this for polygons relating to land cover… it’d
be great to avoid adding more.

I guess if people want to add burned areas, my only suggestion is that
whoever does so takes it upon themselves to return and update things later…

Regards,

Adam
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[Warin]

On 27/1/20 11:13 pm, Ewen Hill wrote:

I would only be replacing any known houses and outbuildings with 
buildling=ruins. There are a number of old bridges that fall probably 
under this category along railtrails etc.



I don't think much of the tag building=ruins. A church in ruins is still 
recognizable as an exchurch.


Much rather use the life cycle tagging, so building=church becomes 
ruined:building=church.



however the bush and grasslands will regrow ... unless it happens to 
reburn again this season.


  In Victoria over 1000 buildings have been damaged or destroyed 
however some areas are yet to be checked. This will change the fabric 
of some Victorian towns. The Clifton Hill school with around 15 
children may never be rebuilt with children now commuting to Bairnsdale.


   All the other .infrastructure will probably return although 
there is 5,500km of roads to be cleared of dangerous trees and some 
crews are doing only 3km per day due to the dangerous state some trees 
are in.


  I would be looking at reverting any change-sets that have 
brownfield/burnt other than the building=ruins


Ewen



On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 21:07, Andrew Davidson > wrote:


On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:51 PM Andrew Harvey
mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>> wrote:


I have thought about if we should map burnt areas, it's tricky
because while it is surveyable, it changes quickly and the
point at when it changes to no longer burnt is subjective. For
those reasons I do think it's better to store this in another
database not OSM. There you can capture the burn date and
degree of the burn.


 This was what I was thinking. You'd have to somehow tag when an
area was burnt and to what degree it was burnt. Not really
something I'd expect to see in OSM.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



--
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[Ewen Hill]

I would only be replacing any known houses and outbuildings with
buildling=ruins. There are a number of old bridges that fall probably under
this category along railtrails etc.  however the bush and grasslands will
regrow ... unless it happens to reburn again this season.

  In Victoria over 1000 buildings have been damaged or destroyed however
some areas are yet to be checked. This will change the fabric of some
Victorian towns. The Clifton Hill school with around 15 children may never
be rebuilt with children now commuting to Bairnsdale.

   All the other .infrastructure will probably return although there is
5,500km of roads to be cleared of dangerous trees and some crews are doing
only 3km per day due to the dangerous state some trees are in.

  I would be looking at reverting any change-sets that have
brownfield/burnt other than the building=ruins

Ewen




On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 21:07, Andrew Davidson  wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:51 PM Andrew Harvey 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I have thought about if we should map burnt areas, it's tricky because
>> while it is surveyable, it changes quickly and the point at when it changes
>> to no longer burnt is subjective. For those reasons I do think it's better
>> to store this in another database not OSM. There you can capture the burn
>> date and degree of the burn.
>>
>>
>  This was what I was thinking. You'd have to somehow tag when an area was
> burnt and to what degree it was burnt. Not really something I'd expect to
> see in OSM.
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>


-- 
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[Andrew Davidson]

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:51 PM Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

>
> I have thought about if we should map burnt areas, it's tricky because
> while it is surveyable, it changes quickly and the point at when it changes
> to no longer burnt is subjective. For those reasons I do think it's better
> to store this in another database not OSM. There you can capture the burn
> date and degree of the burn.
>
>
 This was what I was thinking. You'd have to somehow tag when an area was
burnt and to what degree it was burnt. Not really something I'd expect to
see in OSM.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging burnt areas

[Andrew Harvey]

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=brownfield is absolutely
not correct, have you reverted? Which changesets?

They are still wood even if burnt so natural=wood should apply.

I have thought about if we should map burnt areas, it's tricky because
while it is surveyable, it changes quickly and the point at when it changes
to no longer burnt is subjective. For those reasons I do think it's better
to store this in another database not OSM. There you can capture the burn
date and degree of the burn.

If you use burt=yes, it means you need to start cutting up your
natural=wood polygons, which I don't think it's worth it.

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 08:40, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> A German mapper in Carbargo has used landuse=brownfield to map burnt areas.
>
>
> One such area is a recreation ground... so it would be burnt grass.
>
>
> Is it a good idea to map such things?
>
> It could be said this is 'temporary' so not something OSM should map.
>
>
> If so, how should it be tagged?
>
> It is not really a landuse, nor a landcover.
>
> Possibly a new key as a property key, say, burnt=yes?
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Fire Station Operators

[Andrew Harvey]

PS the nation wide emergency facilities database is released at
https://www.emsina.org/emergencyfacilitiesdatabase. It is CC BY Geoscience
Australia and GA have agreed to the waiver. So licensing wise it's
available for use.

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 07:35, Sebastian S.  wrote:

> Hi Graeme,
> I tried to fix some of the skipped ones, however only in one case I could
> find a reference website from RFS or RFB. I however was able to add two
> fire stations that where missing, the base map is your friend here.
> Adding 220 stations via searching the base map is however not a sensible
> way of doing it.
>
>
> On 26 January 2020 12:29:29 pm AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick <
> graemefi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> & done! (apart from ~17 that are too hard, mainly because I can't see if
>> there actually is a Station in that spot / area)
>>
>> However, there were "only" 718 listed. Earlier, Warin mentioned 944
>> stations in the database, & I've spotted 3 that I know of that weren't
>> listed (or previously mapped).
>>
>> How do we find the extra 220 odd?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 11:10, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed as to non fire stations - control center is one, the other
>>> headquarters.
>>>
>>> Headquarters would be an 'office' type function.
>>>
>>> Control center looks, from imagery, to not only control but supply?
>>>
>>> There is a fire & rescue station in 'town' that is mapped into OSM.
>>>
>>> There are a number of rural fire stations around Narrabri .. some of
>>> them unmapped.
>>> These show up very well on the LPI Base Map even when zoomed out a fair
>>> way.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/1/20 8:12 am, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 22:40, Sebastian Spiess 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I've done a few. Two raised questions.

 Narrabri - There are two fire ' services'  according to LPI map. How to
 tag them?
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79336523
>>>
>>>
>>> Looks like there is a Fire Control Center there, I'd just tag that
>>> building as office=government + operator + name, since they have more of an
>>> office function.
>>>
>>>


 and RAYMOND TERRACE Fire Station - This seems to be and old fire
 station
 as according to https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/news.php?news=608
 a new one was built. I can't tell if the old one was closed down.

 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79336870
>>>
>>>
>>> If you're not sure and street level imagery doesn't help, just mark it
>>> as too hard and skip it. You can create a note so that someone with local
>>> knowledge can help.
>>>



 Am 2020-01-08 21:24, schrieb Andrew Harvey:
 > If someone has carefully surveyed the name as signposted I leave that
 > intact. branch is not mandatory but helpful since consumers can choose
 > how they want to format the such as "Narooma", "Narooma RFS", "Narooma
 > Rural Fire Brigade", etc. especially when combined with operator. The
 > whole point was to be neutral on the exact name format and not engage
 > in a mass edit to reformat them to be the same, but instead respect
 > names will look different based on signage.
 >
 > On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 21:05, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
 >
 >> I have used the LPI Base Map for both name and operator, see
 >>
 >> Way: Narooma Fire Station (761122699) [operator fire & rescue]
 >>
 >> and
 >>
 >> Way: Narooma Rural Fire Service (761122698)
 >>
 >> I do not bother with the 'branch' as that is usually the leading
 >> value in the name and probably the same as the areas administration
 >> name too.
 >>
 >> The LPI Base Map also gives the area so it can be mapped as a way.
 >>
 >> On 08/01/20 16:13, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
 >>
 >> No, just confirming details was all I was thinking about!
 >>
 >> Thanks
 >>
 >> Graeme
 >>
 >> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 14:57, Andrew Harvey
 >>  wrote:
 >>
 >> It's normally considered okay to check a business website as a
 >> reference and picking up their contact details, but to err on the
 >> side of caution taking a whole database from fire.nsw.gov.au [1] and
 >> mass importing is not advised.
 >>
 >> So I'd suggest not just copying everything from that website. For
 >> the RFS operated fire stations normally the name will indicate this,
 >> or a quick look at google search results may also indicate,
 >> sometimes it's visible on Mapillary based on the signage.
 >>
 >> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 15:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick
 >>  wrote:
 >>
 >> Just a thought?
 >>
 >> Are we allowed to use  https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=467
 >> or not?
 >>
 >> I've thinking we would still need permission & waiver?
 >>
 >> Big question, I guess, is - are we commercial or not?
 >>
 >> Thanks
 >>
 >> Graeme