[Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
As I have mentioned before I am interested in improving the data on Amenities such as Pubs, Fast Food places. Most of this data can be found openly on the companies own website so I doubt they will have issues with us including the data as they want to be found on the maps. This also works for pubs and restaurants as they would of supplied all the info on their website. I am not copying images or the blurb on the site so I don't think it could be classed as a copyright issue. I wont be getting data from websites like yellow pages, and some of the other directory listings[1] because that data has been collected by a 3rd party and unless they given permission I would assume they would get grumpy. Copyright data is a complicated one but in this circumstance I can't see any restaurants or pubs, etc complaining about their info being available on the best map on the internet. I could see some issues with small businesses such as accountants that work from home etc. But for the moment I am not going near that kind of data. For the moment I will only be working on GB data as I think taking on the world atm is just too much for me. I have managed to get the XML data from XAPI using wget and I have brought the data into JOSM. An example of data that I would like to add to OSM is this, name=Burger King amenity=fast_food operator=Burger King cuisine=burger phone=+44 1179 770791 addr:street=Bath Road addr:city=Bristol addr:postcode=BS4 3BD addr:country=GB url=http://www.burgerking.co.uk It would be nice to get enough data together that we could start to do a similar thing to Google with having a popup when you mouse over the fast_food icon showing you the extra details. We have the chance to supply up-to-date and relevant data. If you use the petrol station lists often found on GPS units the data is often so out of date that you keep finding closed garages. With OSM I hope this will be different because we have a large collection of people checking if places still exist etc. especially if it can be tied in with the bugs.osm.com idea that is out there. People report a closed shop or incorrect telephone number. Should I make a wiki page with my plans on it? I am not much of a wiki person but I could try and get more people involved. If I was to make a wiki page I guess I ought to come up with some standards in naming some restaurants. Some of the big chains such as McDonalds have a myriad of spellings, This makes it hard for GPS devices. I have seen people mention that data such as contact should be kept in a wiki page a referenced by a link but I think that is the wrong way to do it because there are people who will be using OSM via mobile devices and GPS units and going to wiki pages on them things is just a PITA. It does make sense in the case of lets say food reviews of a restaurant, or background info on a historical location. That is my current plan, does anyone see any issues with that?[2] Jack Stringer [1] These directory listings places have collected data from many sources and one of them is likely to be companies websites and I doubt any of them ever asked for permission to copy the address data off the website. I know I never was asked and I am on several sites. [2]cmon this is the internet, I know there will be issues ;-) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] UK Boundaries progressing really well, however why is Hampshire, England not rendering?
There is loads of work going on around the country on the boundaries project which is great to see. Here are a list of all the main administrative boundaries (for England and Wales) and the status of those boundaries. Scotland is a blank canvas if anyone feels motivated to do the work: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_Kingdom/Boundaries Using the Geofabrik boundary viewer one can see all the completed boundaries (disable admin-level 2 and 4 for more clarity). http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=boundaries However, Hampshire (England) is not rendering. I have looked at the data with various tools and can't see what is wrong. The best tool for finding errors in boundaries is this one, but it fails for Hamphire for some reason:- http://osm.cdauth.de/route-manager/relation.php?id=76228 This tool seems to think it is good but doesn't show some sorts of error:- http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/analyze.jsp?relationId=76228 It looks ok here: http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/osm.jsp?relationId=76228 Is also looks ok here (but this doesn't highlight many errors): http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/76228 Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Boundaries progressing really well, however why is Hampshire, England not rendering?
Not sure if this is the problem, but part of the boundary relation does not follow a boundary=administrative way, it follows a road. This is just west of Vernham Dean [1]. The boundary also follows the river Enbourne again without a way tagged boundary=administrative [2]. [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.30756lon=-1.51418zoom=15layers=B000FTF [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.36859lon=-1.22656zoom=15layers=B000FTF Cheers, Chris Peter Miller wrote: There is loads of work going on around the country on the boundaries project which is great to see. Here are a list of all the main administrative boundaries (for England and Wales) and the status of those boundaries. Scotland is a blank canvas if anyone feels motivated to do the work: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_Kingdom/Boundaries Using the Geofabrik boundary viewer one can see all the completed boundaries (disable admin-level 2 and 4 for more clarity). http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=boundaries However, Hampshire (England) is not rendering. I have looked at the data with various tools and can't see what is wrong. The best tool for finding errors in boundaries is this one, but it fails for Hamphire for some reason:- http://osm.cdauth.de/route-manager/relation.php?id=76228 This tool seems to think it is good but doesn't show some sorts of error:- http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/analyze.jsp?relationId=76228 It looks ok here: http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/osm.jsp?relationId=76228 Is also looks ok here (but this doesn't highlight many errors): http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/76228 Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
Jack Stringer wrote: As I have mentioned before I am interested in improving the data on Amenities such as Pubs, Fast Food places. Most of this data can be found openly on the companies own website so I doubt they will have issues with us including the data as they want to be found on the maps. ... Sorry to pour cold water, but though they might not object, Burger King (for example) says ™ ©2009 Burger King Corporation. All rights reserved. on its website at the bottom of the home page. It is copyright infringement to use this data, irrespective of your opinion of their possible attitude. We're trying very hard to keep the OSM data clean from a copyright POV. They won't complain isn't good enough for us. I imagine if you ask them, the big chains (well, everyone, but it's hard to ask everyone) would agree to this data being used (they might even have it in a more amenable form), but I think they do need to be asked since they do explicitly state copyright. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Boundaries progressing really well, however why is Hampshire, England not rendering?
On 2 Jul 2009, at 13:29, Ed Loach wrote: However, Hampshire (England) is not rendering. I have looked at the data with various tools and can't see what is wrong. The best tool for finding errors in boundaries is this one, but it fails for Hamphire for some reason:- http://osm.cdauth.de/route-manager/relation.php?id=76228 It seems to fail for Essex as well, and I'm fairly sure that is OK, so I suspect the tool has problems (though perhaps a sample of two relations is insufficient). Yes, I believe it is a problem with the tool - it seems a bit random about where it works and where it doesn't I suspect (as I managed to email direct), that the problem is related to the pink way on the geofabrik page which it says is always an error. That way was tagged as both boundary=administrative and natural=coastline and the nearby ones I checked are only tagged as natural=coastline; as the way is in three different levels of administrative boundary I removed the tags from the way itself. (Note to Chris Hill, it is (or should be) fine if boundary relations follow non boundary ways if for example the boundary does actually follow the middle of a road or river). There is no need for any tagging on the ways if one is using a relation, however some people prefer to add tagging to the ways as well, although way tagging doesn't work for multiple admin-levels on the same way. It seems to be considered good etiquette to tag the ways simply with boundary=administrative which is also required for the boundaries to show up on Geofabrik - check the ward boundaries in Ipswich where there are ward boundary relations but little tagging on ways and you will see that the boundaries are recognised by Geofabrik but there are no actual boundaries shown. I am adding boundary=administration to the ways to make them look better. It is ok to tag was as boundary=administrative and also natural=coastline - it happens in many places. Some people lay an additional way on top of the road/river/coast for the boundary and some integrate the other feature as the boundary - both work fine. Ed: I notice you have tweeked the 'non-simple' way today. Do you think it is now simple? If not do you want to try and sort it. . I don't know how often geofabrik update their data, but as far as I can see the boundary itself is fine, as evidenced by all the links you sent where it looks OK, but to see whether it was just the pink way upsetting it will probably take until after their next update. The date of the OSM dataset used is always at the bottom of the page and generally shows up in the early afternoon for the previous day. We should therefore see a resolution to the issue tomorrow afternoon assuming the non-simple way is fixed. I am also sure that is the problem because the other two boundaries that rely on the way are also broken, ie South East and Fareham - the South East certainly used to work at some point. Thanks, Peter Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Boundaries progressing really well, however why is Hampshire, England not rendering?
Ed: I notice you have tweeked the 'non-simple' way today. Do you think it is now simple? If not do you want to try and sort it. I checked the way quite a bit. It shares most of its nodes with a section of a beach area, but that shouldn't be an issue. None of the nodes are included in the way twice as far as I could tell (I copied all the ids into Excel and sorted them). Most of the links you gave showed the way as OK - I could only think it was the geofabrik validation not liking the way for some reason, and as it shows coastlines and admin ways as separate checkboxes I've tried bringing the tags on the way down to just coastline (and source) as exists on the boundary relations members slightly further along the coast. If this doesn’t help (as you suggest we'll find out tomorrow) I can revert the way and try something else. Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Boundaries progressing really well, however why is Hampshire, England not rendering?
On 2 Jul 2009, at 14:27, Ed Loach wrote: Ed: I notice you have tweeked the 'non-simple' way today. Do you think it is now simple? If not do you want to try and sort it. I checked the way quite a bit. It shares most of its nodes with a section of a beach area, but that shouldn't be an issue. It is certainly fine for it to share with a beach, it is a great way to do a beach! None of the nodes are included in the way twice as far as I could tell (I copied all the ids into Excel and sorted them). Most of the links you gave showed the way as OK Makes sense. I could only think it was the geofabrik validation not liking the way for some reason, and as it shows coastlines and admin ways as separate checkboxes I've tried bringing the tags on the way down to just coastline (and source) as exists on the boundary relations members slightly further along the coast. If this doesn’t help (as you suggest we'll find out tomorrow) I can revert the way and try something else. Fine. To avoid confusion and having two people fiddling with it are you happy that we leave it to you to do the changes if it still fails tomorrow? If we get really stuck we could report it to Geofabrik who are very helpful or you could talk further on the list. One approach would be to rip the way up and build a new one in the same place but we won't learn a lot by doing that. Its a shame the coastline checker is down. Regards, Peter Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
Hi Jack, On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 11:32:16 +0100, Jack Stringer wrote: It would be nice to get enough data together that we could start to do a similar thing to Google with having a popup when you mouse over the fast_food icon showing you the extra details. I think it would be good, so two thoughts... Thomas Wood and I are planning to set our Sutton Green Map up to do something similar, basically taking a weekly dump of selected POIs and putting them through FeatureServer to help OpenLayers present the popups. We already have this working but with the data manually stored and entered into a separate database: http://map.oneplanetsutton.org So I'm going to be putting data that is either public domain, or which I have permission to copy, into OSM tags for all of those and more soon. The other thought is maintenance. I know this is an old chestnut, but I worry a bit about encouraging huge detail on POIs that are likely to change often, e.g. takeaways in my part of the world aren't worth the bother of tracking and are all over the place anyway so you'd never need a map to find one! But I would like to enter more detail for museums, leisure centres, libraries and all the other POIs that are easy to maintain. I would have thought that Google is grabbing that data from its search engine scraping and user submissions anyway, rather than trying to maintain a database of all businesses? Regards, Tom ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Anyone in Newport
Can fix this? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/8129695.stm If not already :-) Best Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Bus routes
I want to add some bus routes around where I used to live to the map. What is an acceptable source to supplement my memory? Can I use an online timetable, like these ones, to work out the route? I know the area quite well so I just need the list of stops to derive the route. http://www.londonbusroutes.net/times/R68.htm http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/WebLookupFileResourcesByUNID/docidDF5671AF34A01E4D80257287003BFD5C?openDocument Sorry if this is a daft question but there are such concerns about copyright that I thought I should check. If these are not acceptable, do I need to follow the bus??? Thanks Oliver ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
Not a bad idea. One other thought - we can always pull in data from Wikipedia and link to pages using the wikipedia= tag: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/External_links#Wikipedia No point in trying to duplicate this page, though I doubt Wikipedia has an entry for your petrol station :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Museum Good point Tom If a Wikipedia page exists for the node then it would be worth putting it in. Jack Stringer ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Railway route relations
Route Codes were used on the Southern, and provision was also made for them to appear on the front of Turbos and Networkers, though it wasn't much used (and very little north of the Thames). Each route code in theory tells you the stopping pattern. None of the current operators is very keen on using them, though fashions change. The London Bridge cognoscenti know them, but the general view is that they aren't very user-friendly, and London Underground style platform screens are preferred. Timetable numbers are maintained by Network Rail, largely at their discretion, and generally cover more than one service. Not all that many people use the national timetable, especially since they stopped printing it (more use pocket timetables published by the operators, and even more use journey planners). The number isn't really helpful unless you want to find something in the big book. If we use the operator code in relations, it won't be too hard to change when it transfers. We should probably try to set up a separate service (line) relation for each service (and for each direction), just the same as buses, but we'll have to give them names based on the origin/destination, and maybe not give them a ref for the moment. Network Rail is the operator of the Network, not of trains (at least, not passenger trains). The same distinction occurs in every European country (though the distinction is a bit theoretical in some). Richard On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote: Forgive me for asking. How does the Route Code relate to the number on the front of the Train. eg Charing Cross to Gillingham via Lewisham has a 62 on the front but if it goes via Greenwich its 85 (I think) Does the number on the front of the time-table mean anything? Oh and the Routes listed on the Wiki do not seam to bare any resemblance to what the operators tell you. ie North Kent Line to most people is all lines that go from London to Gillingham via Dartford, ie Via Sidcup (Darford Loop, Bexleyheath, and Woolwich and also includes the Victoria to Dartford via Lewisham service ie all trains in South Eastern Time Table 5. I'm also thinking that we have two sets of operators ie Network Rail and the Franchise Operators, and if we are tagging with the Franchise Operators maybe we should use the name of the franchise rather than the current holder. Or What? Peter. (Slightly confused) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Railway route relations
Forgive me for asking. How does the Route Code relate to the number on the front of the Train. eg Charing Cross to Gillingham via Lewisham has a 62 on the front but if it goes via Greenwich its 85 (I think) Does the number on the front of the time-table mean anything? Oh and the Routes listed on the Wiki do not seam to bare any resemblance to what the operators tell you. ie North Kent Line to most people is all lines that go from London to Gillingham via Dartford, ie Via Sidcup (Darford Loop, Bexleyheath, and Woolwich and also includes the Victoria to Dartford via Lewisham service ie all trains in South Eastern Time Table 5. I'm also thinking that we have two sets of operators ie Network Rail and the Franchise Operators, and if we are tagging with the Franchise Operators maybe we should use the name of the franchise rather than the current holder. Or What? Peter. (Slightly confused) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Railway route relations
LDHS = long distance high speed (aka InterCity) LSE = london south east (aka Network SouthEast) FGW = First Great Western NXEA = National Express East Anglia S-bahn are stopping services RE are Regional Express (about the equivalent of London-Northampton). Long distance services aren't showing. No relations for the physical in Germany (at least not where I looked around Koeln) Richard On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Brian Prangle bpran...@googlemail.comwrote: Richard - you'll have to explain all your acronyms Peter - I'm confused also about franchise operators and network rail as to what we show in a relation. Until we know better I will tag the physical infrastructure as Strategic Routes. Perhaps the best tagging for train routes is with the Franchise Operator name instead of service number. Having looked at the German map portion of opnvkarte I'm assuming that green are local trains and yellow are through (national) routes Interesting what happens when a green and yellow route share the same line ( I haven't had time to look but is there also a relation for the physical i.e brown on all the routes as well? Regards Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
If we get lists of places we are looking for then we can find them on the map and fill the gaps. It also helps us to see what we are still missing from the maps. The list below is only a quick list. Amenities to get data for, Airports Ambulance Stations Banks Bus Stations Bus Stops (is there post code data?) Car Dealership's (Ford, Honda) Cinemas Coastguard (Boat houses, Emergency Phones) Collages Council Offices Dentists Exhibition Centres Fast Food (major) Fast Food (minor) Ferry Terminals Fire Stations Football Grounds (ManU, Liverpool FC etc.) GP Surgeries Galleries Grave Yards Hospitals (NHS) Hospitals (Private) Hotels Job Centres Leisure Centres Libraries MOT Stations (DVLA may have a list we can request) Magistrates Courts Motorcycle Dealerships (BMW, Yamaha) Museums Petrol Stations (independents) Petrol Stations (major) (BP, Shell, Esso) Phone Boxes Police Stations Primary Schools Pubs Retail (major) (100 stores Homebase, BQ, Pets at home etc.) Retail (minor) (100 stores) Secondary Schools Supermarkets (Tesco, ASDA etc.) Theatres Train Stations University Zoos Do I put this in the wiki[1] in a table showing name and Percentage done, with a page for each list that has a table with the info in it. Columns would be of the info gathered for the nodes and contain a OSM link to the location, and a column for when it was tagged and who by. I don't have the geek powers to make a database driven site that this could all be stored on and edited by other users. Jack Stringer [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_Kingdom under national projects. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
There is also an issue of keeping the data up to date - having loads of data in OSM is great, but we run the risk of it going stale if we're not careful. In that case you might as well let Google win the war when it comes to maps with data on them. Like I said before with such a large userbase we should be able to update and fix errors much quicker than Google and other routing programs. addr:street=Bath Road addr:city=Bristol addr:postcode=BS4 3BD addr:country=GB It seems to me that this data should be derivable from the map itself. Rather than duplicating data by adding addresses and postcodes to each business/building, I think it would be better to figure out a good way of deciding which street, city and postcode the building is attached to. By putting the Postcode in we are supply OSM with the postcode to be able to give that street a post code, same goes for streets. If the data stored is done properly it would make it so much better for when people want to query it. For example I want to find a pub called 'The King's Head' I can seach for them by country, by City. I noticed someone say the other day that OSM is about the data not the map. The map is a by product of the data. The data that we put in could also be used to make a Pub guide, or restaurant guide if people are going to have to put in information about a location it maybe worth putting in as much as we can find out. Jack Stringer ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
The last time you brought this up it was pointed out that web sites have copyright on them and this is a problem for your plans. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can ignore it. Using copyright data without permission IS A SHOW-STOPPER. Please don't continue to ignore the copyright issues people are raising. Cheers, Chris Jack Stringer wrote: As I have mentioned before I am interested in improving the data on Amenities such as Pubs, Fast Food places. Most of this data can be found openly on the companies own website so I doubt they will have issues with us including the data as they want to be found on the maps. ... ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
