Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly task
+1 for 'water' as a general subject for Q1 activities, leaving it open for individuals to interpret as they wish. Q2 can be more data-driven, like the schools and fhrs:ids were. Regards, Jez On Mon, 2 Jan 2017 at 12:37 Brian Prangle wrote: > Hi everyone > > Well we seem to be no nearer reaching agreement on the plethora of > suggestions with more people suggesting what they don't want to do rather > than what they do want to do. > > The only drift I think was there was that it shouldn't be too labour > intensive and given the season it sould be more aimed at remote mapping. > So can I suggest something completely different which might fit the bill? > > How about "water"? There are loads of ways traced from NPE which are way > off, there are loads of missing waterways, and loads of waterways crossing > roads/railways incorrectly, also the coastline could be improved,as could > the shape of many bodies of water etc. > > Regards > > Brian > > On 31 December 2016 at 23:10, Paul wrote: > > On Saturday, 31 December 2016 19:31:06 BST, Jez Nicholson wrote: > > I would welcome a less labour intensive task this quarter. Am still > forging ahead with fhrs:ids but with 2700 establishments in Brighton & Hove > and only me mapping it is hard (but useful) work. > > > On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 23:50 Rob Nickerson, > wrote: > It's not just Notes but the fixme tag too. And yes, this will be skewed to > areas with fewer active mappers. This is partly the point of the project - > to help improve lesser mapped areas and to encourage us to spread the word > about OSM! The aim for me has always been "at least one mapper in every > town". > > We need to pick something for the Q1 Winter months and in my view it's > this quarter where remote mapping best fits. Many fixme tags can be > improved using all the new remote resources we now have access to. > > Rob > > P.s. sorry for new thread - I only read the messages via the archive. > > > Ditto here, for Medway (and when I've got that down to a reasonable > state/weather warmed up, I've got Swale, Maidstone and parts of > Tonbridge/Malling to keep me busy. > > On the plus side, fhrs does give a fair coverage of: > > Pubs > Social clubs > Fast Food > restaurants/cafes > pre-schools > social care establishments > > Though I rather think with social care ones those run by social services > directly have their addresses obfuscated or handled centrally, for possibly > good reasons. > > I'll dip in and out of quarterly projects, as the projects suit my > survey-only methods (checking against the tools) as surveying gives me a > reason to get on the bike or out walking. > > Paul > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly task
Hi everyone Well we seem to be no nearer reaching agreement on the plethora of suggestions with more people suggesting what they don't want to do rather than what they do want to do. The only drift I think was there was that it shouldn't be too labour intensive and given the season it sould be more aimed at remote mapping. So can I suggest something completely different which might fit the bill? How about "water"? There are loads of ways traced from NPE which are way off, there are loads of missing waterways, and loads of waterways crossing roads/railways incorrectly, also the coastline could be improved,as could the shape of many bodies of water etc. Regards Brian On 31 December 2016 at 23:10, Paul wrote: > On Saturday, 31 December 2016 19:31:06 BST, Jez Nicholson wrote: > >> I would welcome a less labour intensive task this quarter. Am still >> forging ahead with fhrs:ids but with 2700 establishments in Brighton & Hove >> and only me mapping it is hard (but useful) work. >> >> >> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 23:50 Rob Nickerson, >> wrote: >> It's not just Notes but the fixme tag too. And yes, this will be skewed >> to areas with fewer active mappers. This is partly the point of the project >> - to help improve lesser mapped areas and to encourage us to spread the >> word about OSM! The aim for me has always been "at least one mapper in >> every town". >> >> We need to pick something for the Q1 Winter months and in my view it's >> this quarter where remote mapping best fits. Many fixme tags can be >> improved using all the new remote resources we now have access to. >> >> Rob >> >> P.s. sorry for new thread - I only read the messages via the archive. >> > > Ditto here, for Medway (and when I've got that down to a reasonable > state/weather warmed up, I've got Swale, Maidstone and parts of > Tonbridge/Malling to keep me busy. > > On the plus side, fhrs does give a fair coverage of: > > Pubs > Social clubs > Fast Food > restaurants/cafes > pre-schools > social care establishments > > Though I rather think with social care ones those run by social services > directly have their addresses obfuscated or handled centrally, for possibly > good reasons. > > I'll dip in and out of quarterly projects, as the projects suit my > survey-only methods (checking against the tools) as surveying gives me a > reason to get on the bike or out walking. > > Paul > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM point of interest counts in each district as a proportion of FHRS
Could you expand & clarify please? What is an OSM candidate? For Tendring, are you saying there's more entities in OSM with an FHRS tag than there are in the FHRS government data? Why are the results arbitrary? Cheers DaveF On 31/12/2016 10:39, Andrew Hain wrote: As an exercise in measuring OSM’s coverage I have crunched the numbers in GregRS’s CSV output to calculate the number of OSM candidates in each district as a proportion of the number of FHRS entries that the program reports. The figures are a bit arbitrary and values over 100% are not necessarily wrong. The tool doesn’t cover Northern Ireland. The list is: 1 Tendring 135.07% 2 Gravesham 117.93% 3 Isles of Scilly 117.81% 4 Rushcliffe 117.58% 5 Blackpool 108.66% 6 East Northamptonshire 108.17% 7 Wellingborough 107.94% 8 Guildford 107.82% 9 Erewash 106.40% 10 Broxtowe 106.14% 11 Argyll and Bute 105.49% 12 Islington 104.16% 13 Gedling 98.48% 14 South Cambridgeshire 97.83% 15 Edinburgh 97.60% 16 Nottingham 97.45% 17 Derbyshire Dales 97.07% 18 Cambridge 96.83% 19 Allerdale 94.78% 20 Wychavon 94.78% 21 West Devon 94.47% 22 Bath and North East Somerset 93.83% 23 Oxford 93.09% 24 Aberdeenshire 92.90% 25 Ryedale 90.70% 26 Mid Devon 89.31% 27 Central Bedfordshire 88.97% 28 Westminster 87.99% 29 South Norfolk 87.13% 30 South Lakeland 86.94% 31 Amber Valley 86.34% 32 Birmingham 85.27% 33 Poole 84.66% 34 Melton 83.60% 35 Lancaster 82.43% 36 Southampton 82.31% 37 South Ribble 81.76% 38 Basingstoke and Deane 81.49% 39 Sevenoaks 81.44% 40 Staffordshire Moorlands 81.22% 41 Camden 81.09% 42 South Hams 80.09% 43 Copeland 79.87% 44 Carlisle 79.84% 45 Gateshead 79.72% 46 Hart 79.69% 47 New Forest 79.65% 48 Winchester 79.49% 49 High Peak 79.23% 50 Eden 78.69% 51 South Tyneside 78.59% 52 Rutland 78.34% 53 Perth and Kinross 77.14% 54 Derby 77.05% 55 East Cambridgeshire 76.82% 56 Shetland Islands 76.34% 57 Breckland 76.18% 58 North East Derbyshire 76.15% 59 Bristol 75.91% 60 Huntingdonshire 75.45% 61 Rother 75.34% 62 Sir Ynys Mon - Isle of Anglesey 75.00% 63 Malvern Hills 74.92% 64 Chelmsford 74.79% 65 Hambleton 74.79% 66 St. Albans 74.31% 67 Sutton 73.25% (corrected) 68 Shropshire 72.57% 69 Ashfield 72.34% 70 Richmondshire 71.91% 71 Lambeth 71.70% 72 Sir Ddinbych - Denbighshire 71.52% 73 Tewkesbury 71.37% 74 Runnymede 71.23% 75 Chesterfield 70.80% 76 Stratford-on-Avon 70.73% 77 Fenland 70.50% 78 South Oxfordshire 70.38% 79 Uttlesford 70.05% 80 York 69.92% 81 Exeter 69.82% 82 West Berkshire 69.75% 83 South Gloucestershire 69.64% 84 Cornwall 69.64% 85 Bromsgrove 69.37% 86 Waverley 69.29% 87 Medway 69.28% 88 Wokingham 69.19% 89 North Dorset 68.99% 90 Wyre Forest 68.86% 91 Cherwell 68.73% 92 Highland 68.55% 93 Taunton Deane 68.41% 94 Cotswold 68.40% 95 Mole Valley 68.32% 96 Eastleigh 67.89% 97 Selby 67.86% 98 West Oxfordshire 67.85% 99 St. Edmundsbury 67.69% 100 East Hampshire 67.66% 101 Test Valley 67.52% 102 Chiltern 67.02% 103 Weymouth and Portland 66.84% 104 Wiltshire 66.35% 105 Midlothian 66.10% 106 Rugby 66.00% 107 Maldon 65.99% 108 Na h-Eileanan an Iar 65.84% 109 Bedford 65.69% 110 East Staffordshire 65.37% 111 Leeds 65.30% 112 Waltham Forest 65.24% 113 City of London 65.10% 114 Wakefield 65.03% 115 East Hertfordshire 64.90% 116 Christchurch 64.74% 117 Three Rivers 64.61% 118 Northumberland 64.60% 119 Darlington 64.55% 120 Abertawe - Swansea 64.31% 121 Gwynedd - Gwynedd 64.16% 122 Reading 64.13% 123 Stroud 63.85% 124 Suffolk Coastal 63.84% 125 East Riding of Yorkshire 63.76% 126 North Hertfordshire 63.68% 127 Cheshire East 63.65% 128 Orkney Islands 63.60% 129 Craven 63.60% 130 Mid Suffolk 63.25% 131 Sheffield 63.22% 132 Tamworth 63.13% 133 Norwich 62.95% 134 Solihull 62.82% 135 Warwick 62.75% 136 North West Leicestershire 62.67% 137 West Dorset 62.61% 138 Kensington and Chelsea 62.53% 139 Surrey Heath 62.34% 140 Vale of White Horse 62.33% 141 North War
