Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
Hi David, On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 05:15:25PM +0100, David Woolley wrote: Using postcode centroids is why so many self contributed business POIs on Google Maps are almost useless for finding the business. I hope no-one is adding POIs based on such data. I agree. This is why the comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) doesn't allow users to copy the location of FHRS establishments into JOSM, only to copy tags for an establishment which is suggested as a match for an existing OSM node/way or is already matched using an fhrs:id but has a mismatched postcode. Thanks, Greg -- Twitter: @gregrs_uk http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org PGP key ID: 64907C8A Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
On 23/10/17 16:23, Gregrs wrote: I'm not sure; it seems to be reverse-geocoded from postcode centroids (which is one reason I wouldn't recommend anyone directly copying FHRS data into OSM without some manual processing). I have contacted the FSA to see what can be done. Using postcode centroids is why so many self contributed business POIs on Google Maps are almost useless for finding the business. I hope no-one is adding POIs based on such data. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
A lot of authorities exclude up to a third of fhrs records from geocoding. These seem to largely be people trading from home and many social care establishments e.g. refuges from domestic violence. It's quite plausible that authority practice on this can change. Paulbiv. Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. Original message From: GregrsDate: 23/10/2017 16:30 (GMT+00:00) To: "Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)" Cc: talk-gb Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs Hi Robert, On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:22:35PM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: >If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode >centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In >fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are >at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments >with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so >presumably that's how many of the coordinates have been >computed in the first place.) Thanks for your email. Yes, I'm pretty sure that's how the locations have been derived in most cases and the comparison tool coalesces nearby establishments into a single marker position and displays a list in the popup for that reason. If the FSA aren't able to solve the problem, I may add another stage of processing to the comparison tool and look up postcode centroids. Thanks, Greg -- Twitter: @gregrs_uk http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org PGP key ID: 64907C8A Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A ___ 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] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
Hi Robert, On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:22:35PM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so presumably that's how many of the coordinates have been computed in the first place.) Thanks for your email. Yes, I'm pretty sure that's how the locations have been derived in most cases and the comparison tool coalesces nearby establishments into a single marker position and displays a list in the popup for that reason. If the FSA aren't able to solve the problem, I may add another stage of processing to the comparison tool and look up postcode centroids. Thanks, Greg -- Twitter: @gregrs_uk http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org PGP key ID: 64907C8A Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
Hi David, On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:03:11PM +0100, David Woolley wrote: Is it possible that they were using NPLG data, that is not open? I'm not sure; it seems to be reverse-geocoded from postcode centroids (which is one reason I wouldn't recommend anyone directly copying FHRS data into OSM without some manual processing). I have contacted the FSA to see what can be done. Thanks, Greg -- Twitter: @gregrs_uk http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org PGP key ID: 64907C8A Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
On 23 October 2017 at 15:52, Gregrswrote: > Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth and > South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of their > FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff towards the end > of the first graph on this page: > http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html. I'm > planning to contact the FSA regarding this as the comparison tool relies on > these geocodes in order to place establishments into a specific district and > show their approximate location. If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so presumably that's how many of the coordinates have been computed in the first place.) Robert -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
On 23/10/17 15:52, Gregrs wrote: Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth and South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of their FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff Is it possible that they were using NPLG data, that is not open? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs
The FHRS/OSM comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) now includes graphs showing progress for each district (e.g. http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/district-91.html) and for the whole of Great Britain (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html). Feel free to report bugs or suggest improvements here: https://github.com/gregrs-uk/fhrs-osm-stats. Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth and South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of their FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff towards the end of the first graph on this page: http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html. I'm planning to contact the FSA regarding this as the comparison tool relies on these geocodes in order to place establishments into a specific district and show their approximate location. Thanks, Greg -- Twitter: @gregrs_uk http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org PGP key ID: 64907C8A Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Leicester A
Hi Gerv Sorry you had problems, mapping hospital departments is one thing that has been puzzling other mappers and myself. Some mappers have used multiple hospitals, which breaks the one real life object to one osm object. There is only one LRI. I have not lived in Leicestershire for six years and was not aware of any changes to the location of A Are you saying it is no longer close to the main entrance and accessed from Infirmary Close? Phil (trigpoint) On 23 October 2017 06:34:09 BST, Gervase Markhamwrote: >I had cause to go to Leicester A on Saturday. It was renewed in April >(Google Earth suggests there was a big building project), and the map >has not been updated, and so it's not clear on OSM where the drop-off >is, or which is the associated multi-storey. The road I think it is, is >part not-marked-as-such and part non-existent. There's also a separate >Children's A entrance. Given the nature of these facilities, and the >terrible Leicester 1-way system, it would be very good to have the map >be extremely clear on these points! > >Can someone local look into the issue, please? > >Thanks :-) > >Gerv > > >___ >Talk-GB mailing list >Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb