Re: [Talk-es] [catastro] Previo de CAT2OSM2: Madrid en 5 minutos (!)
El día 18 de enero de 2013 08:53, Ander Pijoan ander.pij...@deusto.es escribió: El otro problema (donde faltan grandes zonas) me gustaría que hicieses la prueba de volver a lanzar cat2osm2 y ver si sigue pasando. Hemos tenido casos de con dos ejecuciones iguales, tener resultados distintos de alguna parcela o masa que no se ha cogido bien su referencia catastral y no se ha podido crear la jerarquía o no se le han añadido los tags y por eso no se ha exportado. Puede que sea por eso, aunque no se si eso me aliviaría o me mosquearía mucho mas =) OK. Este fin de semana, en un ratillo, hago la prueba. Saludos cordiales -- David Marín Carreño dav...@gmail.com ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] [catastro] Previo de CAT2OSM2: Madrid en 5 minutos (!)
A raíz de lo comentado en la lista de imports, vamos a quitar todos los tags meadow=agricultural de los usos de suelo de prados y praderas: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traduccion_metadatos_catastro_a_map_features Por lo que hemos visto parece que el tag agricultural sirve mas para indicar el uso de elementos generales para usos agrarios como por ejemplo poner un building=yes y use=agricultural o un camino use=agricultural. Saludos. -- Ander Pijoan Lamas Research Assistant, Deustotech Computer Science Engineer University of Deusto E-mail: ander.pij...@deusto.es Phone: +34 664471228 in: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=162888312 ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] [catastro] Previo de CAT2OSM2: Madrid en 5 minutos (!)
Corrijo, se va a quitar el use=agricultural que estaba puesto para arreglarlo y poner meadow=agricultural. Esto si suena mejor. El día 18 de enero de 2013 09:54, Ander Pijoan ander.pij...@deusto.es escribió: A raíz de lo comentado en la lista de imports, vamos a quitar todos los tags meadow=agricultural de los usos de suelo de prados y praderas: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traduccion_metadatos_catastro_a_map_features Por lo que hemos visto parece que el tag agricultural sirve mas para indicar el uso de elementos generales para usos agrarios como por ejemplo poner un building=yes y use=agricultural o un camino use=agricultural. Saludos. -- Ander Pijoan Lamas Research Assistant, Deustotech Computer Science Engineer University of Deusto E-mail: ander.pij...@deusto.es Phone: +34 664471228 in: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=162888312 -- Ander Pijoan Lamas Research Assistant, Deustotech Computer Science Engineer University of Deusto E-mail: ander.pij...@deusto.es Phone: +34 664471228 in: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=162888312 ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] [Imports] [Cat2Osm2] Tool for exporting Spanish Cadastre data in OSM suitable format
On 18/01/13 00:01, Cruz Enrique Borges Hernandez wrote: Fist of all, thanks for the comments. I will answers them in place. There appear to be some ways with duplicated way nodes (i.e. a way having the same node multiple times, other than when closing a loop). JOSM's validator can find these. This have already been addressed. There are some duplicate nodes. An example can be found at 40.8253351, -5.4437406. I'll be talking more about duplicate nodes later. I am not sure about this (most probably is a duplicate node in the original data) but in any case the JOSM validator should catch these. We have tried very hard to reuse as much nodes and ways as the data allow us. The road network does not appear to be consistently connected, for example at 40.8182542, -5.4476705 We are already aware of this problem. The road network is probably the less interested part of the dataset: they are inaccurate and their geometries are completely screw-up. It is only provided because some locals mapper thought that it can be useful as a starting point in a completely empty place. Tagging: You appear to be using landuse=reservoir for unknown water. Most of the ones I looked at would be better suited as natural=water. natural=water is also better suited for unknown bodies of water. Geometries with water tags are one of the most difficult tags to translate. The problem comes from the original data: it does not maintain internal consistency between different towns. Others difficult tags are parking spaces and greenfield for the same reason. In the end, all of them (and probably others ones that will appear in other regions) should be revised manually by the local community. We have already planned to have wiki pages with regional information about the import process given tips about this things. Are there any tags that will be used other than those in this sample file? This is the full list (sorry about the spanish): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traduccion_metadatos_catastro_a_map_features Please, if you found any mistake, let us know before changing the table. I let you know some mistakes I've seen: 1) In Tipos de cultivo, the MI Mimbreras o cañaverales, is tagged wetland=marsh, that is better tagged as natural=wetland + wetland=marsh ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwetland ) 2) For regular expresions for ROTULO, at the end of the page, I think tags should be consistent with those we have in other parts of the file, like for example: Ermita (RER,SER) is tagged as amenity=place_of_worship, religion=christian, denomination=catholic, building=hermitage in the Religioso (R) section, but tagged as amenity=place_of_worship, religion=christian, denomination=roman_catholic, building=church in the table of expresión regular at the end of the page. I didn't correct any of these errors. The import is proposing a new tag, use=agricultural. This is found on landuse=meadow areas. Are there any new tags that this import is proposing to use? This is ,almost for sure, a bug in our code. Anyway, the complete list are in the previous link. How were the tag translations arrived at? The translation tags was made from: - What catastro documentation said: http://www.catastro.meh.es/pdf/formatos_intercambio/catastro_fin_cat_2006.pdf. - What experts mappers have said. In fact, the pages have been almost completely filled by expert mappers from the Spanish community. - What persons close to the catastro office have said to us. - Obviously, our own experience using this data in other projects. Taking the example of landuse=greenfield, was this decided on based on descriptions from the catastro, or was it based on inspection of the areas that it applies to with aerial imagery, surveys or other resources? The areas tagged with landuser=greenfield aren't areas with no past or present buildings scheduled for development (i.e. virgin ground that will be turned into a construction site) Our experience over that specific tag is that catastro have overused it: there are places tagged (in catastro) as a greenfield that should be another thing (normally landuse=village_green or recreation_ground). Probably this is due to differences in the definitions of the two ontologies. If you go for this method, how do you intend to handle duplicate nodes? The problem is that if two files that contain nodes at the same position are uploaded in two different edit sessions JOSM will not merge the nodes, even if they were merged in the concatenated file. This problem should not happen never. The splitted files consist on an entire block of buildings that cannot share any node, by definition. In any case, the conflation with existing data will be responsibility of the local mappers. Other: To what extent do you intend the importers verify the data? Do you expect them to 1. Verify each object in some way
Re: [Talk-es] [Imports] [Cat2Osm2] Tool for exporting Spanish Cadastre data in OSM suitable format
Thank you very much, you are right. Corrected in the wiki, in the code and we will check for tags consistency. 2013/1/18 Rafael Avila Coya ravilac...@gmail.com: On 18/01/13 00:01, Cruz Enrique Borges Hernandez wrote: Fist of all, thanks for the comments. I will answers them in place. There appear to be some ways with duplicated way nodes (i.e. a way having the same node multiple times, other than when closing a loop). JOSM's validator can find these. This have already been addressed. There are some duplicate nodes. An example can be found at 40.8253351, -5.4437406. I'll be talking more about duplicate nodes later. I am not sure about this (most probably is a duplicate node in the original data) but in any case the JOSM validator should catch these. We have tried very hard to reuse as much nodes and ways as the data allow us. The road network does not appear to be consistently connected, for example at 40.8182542, -5.4476705 We are already aware of this problem. The road network is probably the less interested part of the dataset: they are inaccurate and their geometries are completely screw-up. It is only provided because some locals mapper thought that it can be useful as a starting point in a completely empty place. Tagging: You appear to be using landuse=reservoir for unknown water. Most of the ones I looked at would be better suited as natural=water. natural=water is also better suited for unknown bodies of water. Geometries with water tags are one of the most difficult tags to translate. The problem comes from the original data: it does not maintain internal consistency between different towns. Others difficult tags are parking spaces and greenfield for the same reason. In the end, all of them (and probably others ones that will appear in other regions) should be revised manually by the local community. We have already planned to have wiki pages with regional information about the import process given tips about this things. Are there any tags that will be used other than those in this sample file? This is the full list (sorry about the spanish): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traduccion_metadatos_catastro_a_map_features Please, if you found any mistake, let us know before changing the table. I let you know some mistakes I've seen: 1) In Tipos de cultivo, the MI Mimbreras o cañaverales, is tagged wetland=marsh, that is better tagged as natural=wetland + wetland=marsh ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwetland ) 2) For regular expresions for ROTULO, at the end of the page, I think tags should be consistent with those we have in other parts of the file, like for example: Ermita (RER,SER) is tagged as amenity=place_of_worship, religion=christian, denomination=catholic, building=hermitage in the Religioso (R) section, but tagged as amenity=place_of_worship, religion=christian, denomination=roman_catholic, building=church in the table of expresión regular at the end of the page. I didn't correct any of these errors. The import is proposing a new tag, use=agricultural. This is found on landuse=meadow areas. Are there any new tags that this import is proposing to use? This is ,almost for sure, a bug in our code. Anyway, the complete list are in the previous link. How were the tag translations arrived at? The translation tags was made from: - What catastro documentation said: http://www.catastro.meh.es/pdf/formatos_intercambio/catastro_fin_cat_2006.pdf. - What experts mappers have said. In fact, the pages have been almost completely filled by expert mappers from the Spanish community. - What persons close to the catastro office have said to us. - Obviously, our own experience using this data in other projects. Taking the example of landuse=greenfield, was this decided on based on descriptions from the catastro, or was it based on inspection of the areas that it applies to with aerial imagery, surveys or other resources? The areas tagged with landuser=greenfield aren't areas with no past or present buildings scheduled for development (i.e. virgin ground that will be turned into a construction site) Our experience over that specific tag is that catastro have overused it: there are places tagged (in catastro) as a greenfield that should be another thing (normally landuse=village_green or recreation_ground). Probably this is due to differences in the definitions of the two ontologies. If you go for this method, how do you intend to handle duplicate nodes? The problem is that if two files that contain nodes at the same position are uploaded in two different edit sessions JOSM will not merge the nodes, even if they were merged in the concatenated file. This problem should not happen never. The splitted files consist on an entire block of buildings that cannot share any node, by definition. In any case, the conflation with existing data will be responsibility of the local
[Talk-es] OpenStreetMap juega una mala pasada a los mapas de Apple
http://www.applesfera.com/curiosidades/calle-mono-malo-openstreetmaps-juega-una-mala-pasada-a-los-mapas-de-apple -- Ander Pijoan Lamas Research Assistant, Deustotech Computer Science Engineer University of Deusto E-mail: ander.pij...@deusto.es Phone: +34 664471228 in: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=162888312 ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] OpenStreetMap juega una mala pasada a los mapas de Apple
Se les ha visto el plumero una vez más :( On 18 January 2013 16:45, Ander Pijoan ander.pij...@deusto.es wrote: http://www.applesfera.com/curiosidades/calle-mono-malo-openstreetmaps-juega-una-mala-pasada-a-los-mapas-de-apple -- Ander Pijoan Lamas Research Assistant, Deustotech Computer Science Engineer University of Deusto E-mail: ander.pij...@deusto.es Phone: +34 664471228 in: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=162888312 ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es -- Atentamente, Suárez ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
