Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Warin]

On 29-Dec-17 07:28 AM, Mark Goodge wrote:



On 28/12/2017 19:31, Lester Caine wrote:

Get the return address right ...

On 28/12/17 16:12, Colin Spiller wrote:
I've been adding postcodes in the Bradford BD area using Robert & 
gregrs

useful tools. I've just noticed that the Shell station at the Rooley
Lane / Rooley Avenue junction BD5 8JR is now reported as having an
incorrect postal unit (the final two letters of the postcode). This
postcode appears widely on the internet for this site, but the RM
postcode finder thinks it should be Rooley Avenue, BD6 1DA.


PAF file has ...
Shell Filling Station
Rooley Avenue
BRADFORD
BD6 1DA

and BD5 8JR is not listed having been deleted in 2009
http://checkmypostcode.uk/bd58jr so the real problem is does one leave
the faulty postcode in place because we can't use the PAF data or do we
validate postcodes against the codepoint database and remove those that
are not listed


It's an interesting conundrum, on several levels. We can certainly 
validate against Codepoint Open or the ONSPD, as these are open data. 
So if they say the postcode is impossible (because it's defunct), then 
we can definitely delete it if we want to.


Replacing it with the correct postcode, though, is harder. We'd need a 
source that isn't derived from PAF. But Googling for this particular 
station, all the sources have the old, incorrect postcode - even 
Google itself! (I would expect they're all using the Shell data, of 
course).


So that leaves us with three options, at least initially:

1. Leave it as is. We know it's wrong, but it's consistent with every 
other source, and it's from the only canonical source.


2. Replace it with the right one. More useful, but potentially risky 
from a licensing perspective.


3. Delete it and leave the entry with no postcode. Probably the best 
we can do as far as accuracy is concerned (in line with the general 
principle that data is better missing than wrong, if it can't be 
right), and avoids any licence conflict. But this is the least useful 
for users of the data (since, in this case, even the wrong postcode 
will identify the location in practice - for obvious reasons, Royal 
Mail will deliver to defunct postcodes long after they have been 
deleted, and many sat-navs will work with defunct postcodes too).


Maybe the best solution is to leave it alone for now, and see if we 
can persuade Shell to fix it. Deleting the postcode risks it being 
re-added by someone else who spots its absence and decides to be 
helpful, without realising that if they use the RM postcode finder to 
validate it that isn't compatible with OSM's licence.


Usually a note is used to make comments to other mappers. In this case a 
note to say that post code xxx is defunct would explain the situation. 
Possibly a tag 'defunct:postcode=xxx would also be explanatory.


Could the post code be derived from surrounding features?
I don't know how detailed the post codes there are .. but if features in 
OSM surrounding it were of the same post code (and correct) then they 
could be used to derive the post code?


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Mark Goodge]

On 28/12/2017 19:31, Lester Caine wrote:

Get the return address right ...

On 28/12/17 16:12, Colin Spiller wrote:

I've been adding postcodes in the Bradford BD area using Robert & gregrs
useful tools. I've just noticed that the Shell station at the Rooley
Lane / Rooley Avenue junction BD5 8JR is now reported as having an
incorrect postal unit (the final two letters of the postcode). This
postcode appears widely on the internet for this site, but the RM
postcode finder thinks it should be Rooley Avenue, BD6 1DA.


PAF file has ...
Shell Filling Station
Rooley Avenue
BRADFORD
BD6 1DA

and BD5 8JR is not listed having been deleted in 2009
http://checkmypostcode.uk/bd58jr so the real problem is does one leave
the faulty postcode in place because we can't use the PAF data or do we
validate postcodes against the codepoint database and remove those that
are not listed


It's an interesting conundrum, on several levels. We can certainly 
validate against Codepoint Open or the ONSPD, as these are open data. So 
if they say the postcode is impossible (because it's defunct), then we 
can definitely delete it if we want to.


Replacing it with the correct postcode, though, is harder. We'd need a 
source that isn't derived from PAF. But Googling for this particular 
station, all the sources have the old, incorrect postcode - even Google 
itself! (I would expect they're all using the Shell data, of course).


So that leaves us with three options, at least initially:

1. Leave it as is. We know it's wrong, but it's consistent with every 
other source, and it's from the only canonical source.


2. Replace it with the right one. More useful, but potentially risky 
from a licensing perspective.


3. Delete it and leave the entry with no postcode. Probably the best we 
can do as far as accuracy is concerned (in line with the general 
principle that data is better missing than wrong, if it can't be right), 
and avoids any licence conflict. But this is the least useful for users 
of the data (since, in this case, even the wrong postcode will identify 
the location in practice - for obvious reasons, Royal Mail will deliver 
to defunct postcodes long after they have been deleted, and many 
sat-navs will work with defunct postcodes too).


Maybe the best solution is to leave it alone for now, and see if we can 
persuade Shell to fix it. Deleting the postcode risks it being re-added 
by someone else who spots its absence and decides to be helpful, without 
realising that if they use the RM postcode finder to validate it that 
isn't compatible with OSM's licence.


Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Lester Caine]

Get the return address right ...

On 28/12/17 16:12, Colin Spiller wrote:
> I've been adding postcodes in the Bradford BD area using Robert & gregrs
> useful tools. I've just noticed that the Shell station at the Rooley
> Lane / Rooley Avenue junction BD5 8JR is now reported as having an
> incorrect postal unit (the final two letters of the postcode). This
> postcode appears widely on the internet for this site, but the RM
> postcode finder thinks it should be Rooley Avenue, BD6 1DA.

PAF file has ...
Shell Filling Station
Rooley Avenue
BRADFORD
BD6 1DA

and BD5 8JR is not listed having been deleted in 2009
http://checkmypostcode.uk/bd58jr so the real problem is does one leave
the faulty postcode in place because we can't use the PAF data or do we
validate postcodes against the codepoint database and remove those that
are not listed

> The node Fuel #5210358416 
> has these tags:
> 
> 
> Tags
> 
> addr:postcode
> 
> BD5 8JR
> amenity 
> fuel 
> brand Shell
> opening_hours
> 
> 24/7
> phone +44
> 1274 306188 
> ref:navads_shell  NVDS353-12038573
> 
> 
> but no street or city. The whole thing seems odd to me.


-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Andy Mabbett]

On 26 November 2017 at 14:52, Philip Barnes  wrote:

> This would make obvious errors easier to spot, one example I found was
> a closing time of 16:00 which is an obvious error that does not need
> local knowledge.

At a supermarket filling station near me, the "kiosk" actually closes at a
time not far different from this. fter that, fuel is only available from
self-service pumps - and is available from them 24/7.

Given the increasing ubiquity of the latter, plus pay-for-water and
pay-for-air machines, we need to be careful with "closing" times.

[Wonders off, muttering about when air was free...]

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi Colin,

BD5 8JP is but a stone's throw away. I guess this got picked up then
incorrectly typed and hence the 8JR ending.

Luckily OSM is editable (!) so if you can find a better source of free data
then please update.

Regards,
Rob

P.s. you can see all this on the postcode centroid map which highlights
that this is borderline BD5 and BD6.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Colin Spiller]

I've been adding postcodes in the Bradford BD area using Robert & gregrs 
useful tools. I've just noticed that the Shell station at the Rooley 
Lane / Rooley Avenue junction BD5 8JR is now reported as having an 
incorrect postal unit (the final two letters of the postcode). This 
postcode appears widely on the internet for this site, but the RM 
postcode finder thinks it should be Rooley Avenue, BD6 1DA.


The node Fuel #5210358416  
has these tags:



   Tags

addr:postcode 
 
BD5 8JR
amenity  
fuel 

brand Shell
opening_hours 
 
24/7
phone  	+44 
1274 306188 

ref:navads_shellNVDS353-12038573


but no street or city. The whole thing seems odd to me.

Colin


On 20/12/17 12:32, Ilya Zverev wrote:

Hi folks,

I have just uploaded the fuel stations:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/54785385

Thank you everyone who participated. I noticed there has been many "fixme" tags 
filled during the validation. You can see them all using Overpass API:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/tUW

Ilya
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


--
Colin Spiller
co...@thespillers.org.uk

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