Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Rob Nickerson]

>Hi Rob et al.,
>
>I've created a quick umap instance
>
>showing school points within a school polygon.
>
>If anyone can tell me how to remove the bit of html which makes the url to
>the polygon not work, do let me know.
>
>Regards,
>
>Jerry

Hi Jerry,

Hope you are well.

As we're now half way through the project would it be possible to get an
update of this map? Hoping to see a lot fewer nodes within school polygons!

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Andy Mabbett]

On 7 January 2016 at 11:35, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
 wrote:

> we need a corresponding key name for
> Scottish schools. These are (mostly) not listed in Edubase and the
> Scottish Government have their own list and ID numbers for their
> schools. I've used the list at
> http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Statistics/Browse/School-Education/Datasets/contactdetails
> which has a "SeedCode" field. Presumably SEED="Scottish Executive
> Education Department".

FYI, there is now a "Seed number" property in Wikidata:

   https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P2524

We should begin populating that shortly.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Lester Caine]

On 13/01/16 11:24, Ed Loach wrote:
> Is there an easy way to find a wikidata reference (if there is one) if you 
> have the DfE URN (the ref:edubase value)? 
> I've not been adding wikidata tags so far as I don't know how to find the 
> value without a lot of searching. 
> And if there is an easy way, do we really need both ref:edubase and wikidata 
> tags on the same object?

Where a clean identifier to third party data is available it makes sense
to use it. And in this case the fact that we can freely use the edubase
reference is nice. There is no need to have to bounce through some other
service because of licence restrictions, so only that reference is
needed. Using that to look up a mirror record in wikidata seems
pointless in this case? That wikidata could return their version via a
link from the base reference is their problem? I'm not planning to work
on wikidata to add missing records, so making a wikidata tag a
'required' on the project seems wrong!

All my local schools have a boundary tagged with amenity=school, but for
speed I'm using potlatch2 rather than josm and the existing defaults on
the details don't match the project guidelines. I'm a little loathed to
re-tag details simply to change from one style to another especially
when it then no longer displays in potlatch2, adding to which I have
listed building information on some buildings as well ...

We do not have any mechanism as yet to use references like this to
leaver the third party data which would simplify accessing data such as
website, so I am planning to duplicate that entry from the edubase site
for website and phone.

Just as a little funny. My wife's school had 119 pupils ...  60 boys and
60 girls :)

-- 
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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Jez Nicholson]

One of them had lost an eye?

On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 at 13:18 Lester Caine  wrote:

> On 13/01/16 11:24, Ed Loach wrote:
> > Is there an easy way to find a wikidata reference (if there is one) if
> you have the DfE URN (the ref:edubase value)?
> > I've not been adding wikidata tags so far as I don't know how to find
> the value without a lot of searching.
> > And if there is an easy way, do we really need both ref:edubase and
> wikidata tags on the same object?
>
> Where a clean identifier to third party data is available it makes sense
> to use it. And in this case the fact that we can freely use the edubase
> reference is nice. There is no need to have to bounce through some other
> service because of licence restrictions, so only that reference is
> needed. Using that to look up a mirror record in wikidata seems
> pointless in this case? That wikidata could return their version via a
> link from the base reference is their problem? I'm not planning to work
> on wikidata to add missing records, so making a wikidata tag a
> 'required' on the project seems wrong!
>
> All my local schools have a boundary tagged with amenity=school, but for
> speed I'm using potlatch2 rather than josm and the existing defaults on
> the details don't match the project guidelines. I'm a little loathed to
> re-tag details simply to change from one style to another especially
> when it then no longer displays in potlatch2, adding to which I have
> listed building information on some buildings as well ...
>
> We do not have any mechanism as yet to use references like this to
> leaver the third party data which would simplify accessing data such as
> website, so I am planning to duplicate that entry from the edubase site
> for website and phone.
>
> Just as a little funny. My wife's school had 119 pupils ...  60 boys and
> 60 girls :)
>
> --
> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 7 January 2016 at 20:48, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> Also I'm finding that frequently I'm adding  names to pre-existing school
> polygons. Could Rob's progress tool also count schools with names?

I've just set up another report:
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/osm-tag-keys.html (thought
that's currently only counting things on amenity=school ways.)

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Stuart Reynolds]

I wouldn’t like to say that it is definitive, because I haven't added 
playgrounds, parking or recreation facilities, but try 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36439931 or 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49655265#map=18/51.55355/0.69659 both of which 
relate to Southend High School for Boys, which is one that I’ve recently 
tweaked.

There are other examples - just west of there, on the south side of Prittlewell 
Chase, lie two other schools Chase High School and Lancaster School.

They all have boundary polygons, gates, school buildings and edubase tags.

Regards,
Stuart



On 8 Jan 2016, at 17:27, Paul Berry 
> wrote:

I see the diagram and suggested process on the Wiki page but do we have an 
actual mapped example that could be used to further illustrate this. A link to 
a changeset containing this, or whatever's appropriate, would be useful.

If you've mapped one, now's the chance for a bit of glory in setting an example 
for the rest of us :)

I'm aiming to contribute schools in South and West Yorkshire (Sheffield and 
Leeds mostly) from an armchair POV...

Regards,
Paul Berry


On 7 January 2016 at 23:00, Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
On 7 January 2016 at 20:48, Brian Prangle 
> wrote:

> If no-one objects to ref:edubase can someone add it to the wiki?  We should
> probably also add some other  stuff that's come up just in case there are
> folk who are not on this mailing list who want to discover what the
> consensus is in the UK for mapping schools.

Please see:

   
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects#Suggested_process_.26_tags

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Dave F.]

FYI (although you've probably already noticed) The database was updated 
yesterday.


Dave F.


On 08/01/2016 09:33, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

On 7 January 2016 at 20:48, Brian Prangle  wrote:

Also I'm finding that frequently I'm adding  names to pre-existing school
polygons. Could Rob's progress tool also count schools with names?

I've just set up another report:
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/osm-tag-keys.html (thought
that's currently only counting things on amenity=school ways.)

Robert.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Paul Berry]

I see the diagram and suggested process on the Wiki page but do we have an
actual mapped example that could be used to further illustrate this. A link
to a changeset containing this, or whatever's appropriate, would be useful.

If you've mapped one, now's the chance for a bit of glory in setting an
example for the rest of us :)

I'm aiming to contribute schools in South and West Yorkshire (Sheffield and
Leeds mostly) from an armchair POV...

Regards,
*Paul Berry*


On 7 January 2016 at 23:00, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> On 7 January 2016 at 20:48, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>
> > If no-one objects to ref:edubase can someone add it to the wiki?  We
> should
> > probably also add some other  stuff that's come up just in case there are
> > folk who are not on this mailing list who want to discover what the
> > consensus is in the UK for mapping schools.
>
> Please see:
>
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects#Suggested_process_.26_tags
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Stuart Reynolds]

My vote would go to a format of ref:. Looking at the wiki for ref, a 
great many of the “” there are not things that can be ascertained 
from a ground survey, but are internal IDs or reference numbers. What I am 
proposing is therefore consistent with the wiki.

I’m not at all hung up on what  should be, though. “edubase” ought 
to feature in there somewhere, and while I am minded to add “uk” as well, none 
of the entries tabulated on the wiki seem to bother with the country name. So 
would someone care to pick one, or choose one of these suggestions:


  *   ref:edubase
  *   ref:edubase_urn
  *   ref:uk_edubase
  *   ref:uk_edubase_urn
  *   ref:school:edubase
  *   ref:school:edubase_urn

I think that my favourite is the first - it has the benefit of simplicity, and 
it is something that people are likely to be able to remember and therefore 
use. And in case anyone really doesn’t know what it is, “edubase” is readily 
google-able.

I would like to start adding these in / amending the tags that I already have, 
so if we could reach some consensus then that would be great. Thanks.

Regards,
Stuart



On 6 Jan 2016, at 14:06, SK53 > 
wrote:

Purely a personal preference, but I like to keep ref for thing which 
(generally) can be determined on a ground survey. I also like to keep separate 
genuine administrative references (such as the PRoW ones prow_ref, or minor 
roads admin_ref) separate from exposed system keys such as the edubase one.

For Food Hygiene (FHRS) data the equivalent internal identifier has converged 
on fhrs:id, but this was is in part because a number of other items of data 
from the Food Hygiene scheme have also been added within OSM. So I dont think 
this establishes any precedent for whether one has ref:supplier or supplier:ref 
or supplier_ref. Consistency would be nice but is not essential

If adding an edubase identifier, I'd also appreciate it if a FHRS one can be 
added too. These are certainly invariant, only changing when the premises 
change ownership. (I'm not sure what applies when school catering is 
outsourced, or if a school acquires academy status.

I must say I like the various suggestions for better micromapping of schools: 
this means that there is plenty to do even in well mapped areas. One thing I've 
always wanted to map, but have never noticed suitable tags, are the 
hard-surfaced school playgrounds. Clearly, using the existing 
leisure=playground is a poor idea as it changes the meaning of existing mapped 
objects; and also many primary schools will have a proper playground too.

Jerry

On 6 January 2016 at 12:42, Stuart Reynolds 
> 
wrote:
Hi Jez,

I was pondering that myself as I added the Edubase numbers to the schools that 
I have added and/or modified. I had two thoughts: one, we could just write a 
piece of free text such as “UK Edubase” in front of the ref; two, which is more 
elegant although involving non-standard tags, is that we tag it as 
ref:uk_edubase=* (or similar).

Regards,
Stuart



On 6 Jan 2016, at 11:36, Jez Nicholson 
> wrote:

On the ref=*. Is there any convention for indicating that the ref is Edubase? 
I've tagged Brighton Montessori with ref=133348 ...but how would an interested 
party know that they would be able to find more details on Edubase 
http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=133348 ?

I agree that where an object is clearly 'owned' by an authority/company/etc. 
that it is *the* 'ref'. e.g. postbox numbers

Regards,
Jez

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 at 17:05 Stuart Reynolds 
> 
wrote:
I’m thinking that while we are reviewing the schools, it would be a good idea 
to add the Edubase reference into a Ref tag for each school boundary polygon, 
to make it easier to track in future. Is that reference stable enough?
If we think that it is a good idea, perhaps we could make it part of an agreed 
“do minimum” for this project. For example:


  *   draw and tag the boundary polygon with a minimum of
 *   amenity=school
 *   name=*
 *   ref=*
  *   add entrances
 *   at least one entrance=main
 *   barrier=gate where appropriate - I would have thought most schools 
will have gates
 *   others entrances where appropriate
  *   then optionally, but preferably, draw the school buildings and tag 
building=school.

I know we don’t want to be prescriptive, but it would certainly help people 
(like myself) who haven't participated in projects before ’t there was a 
(readily achievable) level of expectation as to what involvement in the project 
meant.

Personally I have been adding in the buildings, but I haven’t been worrying 
(for now) about playing fields and the like - I’ll go back and revisit those if 
I have time. But there are a surprising 

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Brian Prangle]

Many many thanks to Robert for coming up with this tool so quickly: it's
matching might be a bit rough but it's a great help in finding what needs
mapping where

regards

Brian

On 3 January 2016 at 18:43, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2 January 2016 at 12:51, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> > Happy New Year! (and Happy New Mapping Year!) The first Quarterly Project
> > for 2016 is now under way and is Schools. There are really two strands to
> > this project.
> >
> > The first is to remotely (armchai)r map and get an increase in coverage
> of
> > the number of schools
> >
> > The latest government data is for January 2012 which shows 24,372
> schools in
> > England (including nursery schools, state-funded primary schools,
> > state-funded secondary schools, special schools, pupil referral units and
> > independent schools.)
>
> Since most of the code could be re-used from what I already do for
> Post Offices, I've put together a quick comparison tool to compare the
> Edubase data for England with what's currently in OSM:
> http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/progress/
>
> It's a bit rough at the moment. I'm currently only using the data for
> England, and only fetching OSM *ways* tagged with amenity=school .
> There are no markers on the slippy map yet either, and the matching
> process is rather basic. With luck, I'll have some time to make some
> improvements in the next couple of weeks. In the mean time, the lists
> of non-matching items will hopefully still be useful to people.
>
> One caveat though -- I'm not completely sure that the Edubase data is
> (or should be) available under an OSM-compatible Licence (the OGL in
> this case). In particular the addresses and postcodes may be tainted
> by AddressBase. Until the licence is confirmed, we should avoid using
> Edubase data directly to add or edit Schools in OSM. There should be
> sufficient other sources available though.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Robert.
>
> --
> Robert Whittaker
>
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Dave F.]

On 06/01/2016 14:06, SK53 wrote:
For Food Hygiene (FHRS) data the equivalent internal identifier has 
converged on fhrs:id, but this was is in part because a number of 
other items of data from the Food Hygiene scheme have also been added 
within OSM. So I dont think this establishes any precedent for whether 
one has ref:supplier or supplier:ref or supplier_ref. Consistency 
would be nice but is not essential


I thought fhrs:id was adopted because that format is used in The Food 
Standards Agency database. Keeping any such official references the same 
within OSM seems eminently sensible.


Dave F.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Stuart Reynolds]

Brilliant, thanks.

As per Rob's email of yesterday, should we also add ref:seedcode for Scotland? 

Cheers
Stuart


> On 7 Jan 2016, at 23:01, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> 
>> On 7 January 2016 at 20:48, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>> 
>> If no-one objects to ref:edubase can someone add it to the wiki?  We should
>> probably also add some other  stuff that's come up just in case there are
>> folk who are not on this mailing list who want to discover what the
>> consensus is in the UK for mapping schools.
> 
> Please see:
> 
>   
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects#Suggested_process_.26_tags
> 
> -- 
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> 
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Brian Prangle]

If no-one objects to ref:edubase can someone add it to the wiki?  We should
probably also add some other  stuff that's come up just in case there are
folk who are not on this mailing list who want to discover what the
consensus is in the UK for mapping schools.

Also I'm finding that frequently I'm adding  names to pre-existing school
polygons. Could Rob's progress tool also count schools with names?

Currently taginfo reports of 27149 schools only 20818 have names ( 76.68%)

Regards

Brian

On 7 January 2016 at 20:11, Rob Nickerson  wrote:

> I second Stuart & Brian on the use of:
>
> *ref:edubase*
>
> If at some later point somebody has a good reason to use something else it
> would only take a few minutes to edit the tag. As such I'd go for it and
> start adding it to schools.
>
> *Rob*
>
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Rob Nickerson]

Not my tool - I just have a version of it running. Adam has provided me an
updated version that I need to look at this weekend. I can see if I can add
such a percentage tracker at the same time. For now you'll just have to
keep looking at the taginfo page:

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/amenity=school#combinations

*Rob*

On 7 January 2016 at 20:48, Brian Prangle  wrote:

>
> Also I'm finding that frequently I'm adding  names to pre-existing school
> polygons. Could Rob's progress tool also count schools with names?
>
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Jez Nicholson]

On the ref=*. Is there any convention for indicating that the ref is
Edubase? I've tagged Brighton Montessori with ref=133348 ...but how would
an interested party know that they would be able to find more details on
Edubase
http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=133348 ?

I agree that where an object is clearly 'owned' by an
authority/company/etc. that it is *the* 'ref'. e.g. postbox numbers

Regards,
Jez

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 at 17:05 Stuart Reynolds <
stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote:

> I’m thinking that while we are reviewing the schools, it would be a good
> idea to add the Edubase reference into a Ref tag for each school boundary
> polygon, to make it easier to track in future. Is that reference stable
> enough?
> If we think that it is a good idea, perhaps we could make it part of an
> agreed “do minimum” for this project. For example:
>
>
>- draw and tag the boundary polygon with a minimum of
>   - amenity=school
>   - name=*
>   - ref=*
>- add entrances
>   - at least one entrance=main
>   - barrier=gate where appropriate - I would have thought most
>   schools will have gates
>   - others entrances where appropriate
>- then optionally, but preferably, draw the school buildings and tag
>building=school.
>
>
> I know we don’t want to be prescriptive, but it would certainly help
> people (like myself) who haven't participated in projects before ’t there
> was a (readily achievable) level of expectation as to what involvement in
> the project meant.
>
> Personally I have been adding in the buildings, but I haven’t been
> worrying (for now) about playing fields and the like - I’ll go back and
> revisit those if I have time. But there are a surprising number of missing
> schools so I have been looking to get those in first.
>
> Cheers
> Stuart
>
>
>
>
> On 3 Jan 2016, at 21:54, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Some great ideas and tools already shared and only January 3rd!
>
> This made me think I should set up a wiki page but I have been beaten to
> it. I've expanded on the page to add links to all the resources being
> discussed here. Page at:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects
>
> *Rob*
>
> p.s. Big thank you to our wiki system admins who have now added the
> VisualEditor to the wiki. This makes it much easier to edit the wiki so no
> excuses for not keeping the pages up to date :-)
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[SK53]

Purely a personal preference, but I like to keep ref for thing which
(generally) can be determined on a ground survey. I also like to keep
separate genuine administrative references (such as the PRoW ones prow_ref,
or minor roads admin_ref) separate from exposed system keys such as the
edubase one.

For Food Hygiene (FHRS) data the equivalent internal identifier has
converged on fhrs:id, but this was is in part because a number of other
items of data from the Food Hygiene scheme have also been added within OSM.
So I dont think this establishes any precedent for whether one has
ref:supplier or supplier:ref or supplier_ref. Consistency would be nice but
is not essential

If adding an edubase identifier, I'd also appreciate it if a FHRS one can
be added too. These are certainly invariant, only changing when the
premises change ownership. (I'm not sure what applies when school catering
is outsourced, or if a school acquires academy status.

I must say I like the various suggestions for better micromapping of
schools: this means that there is plenty to do even in well mapped areas.
One thing I've always wanted to map, but have never noticed suitable tags,
are the hard-surfaced school playgrounds. Clearly, using the existing
leisure=playground is a poor idea as it changes the meaning of existing
mapped objects; and also many primary schools will have a proper playground
too.

Jerry

On 6 January 2016 at 12:42, Stuart Reynolds <
stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote:

> Hi Jez,
>
> I was pondering that myself as I added the Edubase numbers to the schools
> that I have added and/or modified. I had two thoughts: one, we could just
> write a piece of free text such as “UK Edubase” in front of the ref; two,
> which is more elegant although involving non-standard tags, is that we tag
> it as ref:uk_edubase=* (or similar).
>
> Regards,
> Stuart
>
>
>
> On 6 Jan 2016, at 11:36, Jez Nicholson  wrote:
>
> On the ref=*. Is there any convention for indicating that the ref is
> Edubase? I've tagged Brighton Montessori with ref=133348 ...but how would
> an interested party know that they would be able to find more details on
> Edubase
> http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=133348 ?
>
>
> I agree that where an object is clearly 'owned' by an
> authority/company/etc. that it is *the* 'ref'. e.g. postbox numbers
>
> Regards,
> Jez
>
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 at 17:05 Stuart Reynolds <
> stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> I’m thinking that while we are reviewing the schools, it would be a good
>> idea to add the Edubase reference into a Ref tag for each school boundary
>> polygon, to make it easier to track in future. Is that reference stable
>> enough?
>> If we think that it is a good idea, perhaps we could make it part of an
>> agreed “do minimum” for this project. For example:
>>
>>
>>- draw and tag the boundary polygon with a minimum of
>>   - amenity=school
>>   - name=*
>>   - ref=*
>>- add entrances
>>   - at least one entrance=main
>>   - barrier=gate where appropriate - I would have thought most
>>   schools will have gates
>>   - others entrances where appropriate
>>- then optionally, but preferably, draw the school buildings and tag
>>building=school.
>>
>>
>> I know we don’t want to be prescriptive, but it would certainly help
>> people (like myself) who haven't participated in projects before ’t there
>> was a (readily achievable) level of expectation as to what involvement in
>> the project meant.
>>
>> Personally I have been adding in the buildings, but I haven’t been
>> worrying (for now) about playing fields and the like - I’ll go back and
>> revisit those if I have time. But there are a surprising number of missing
>> schools so I have been looking to get those in first.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Stuart
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3 Jan 2016, at 21:54, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Some great ideas and tools already shared and only January 3rd!
>>
>> This made me think I should set up a wiki page but I have been beaten to
>> it. I've expanded on the page to add links to all the resources being
>> discussed here. Page at:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects
>>
>> *Rob*
>>
>> p.s. Big thank you to our wiki system admins who have now added the
>> VisualEditor to the wiki. This makes it much easier to edit the wiki so no
>> excuses for not keeping the pages up to date :-)
>> ___
>> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Stuart Reynolds]

Hi John,

I don’t know if how I do it is “right”, but I have used access=destination, and 
foot=no where I have those types of things. I haven’t ever used 
amenity=parking_entrance, although that doesn’t mean I’m right as I’m still a  
relative newbie at this compared to many. Actually, I use access=destination on 
all of my school entrances, regardless, as they are rarely, if ever, public 
rights of way and can seem like “shortcuts” between roads which are otherwise 
unconnected.

Cheers
Stuart



On 6 Jan 2016, at 12:04, John Aldridge 
> wrote:

On 05-Jan-16 17:03, Stuart Reynolds wrote:
 * draw and tag the boundary polygon with a minimum of
 o amenity=school
 o name=*
 o ref=*
 * add entrances
 o at least one entrance=main
 o barrier=gate where appropriate - I would have thought most
   schools will have gates
 o others entrances where appropriate
 * then optionally, but preferably, draw the school buildings and tag
   building=school.

I have a school car-park tagging question...


Suppose there's a vehicle entrance, distinct from the main/pedestrian entrance, 
leading (perhaps via some service road) to the school car-park. How should this 
best be tagged? Is

 amenity=parking_entrance

the appropriate tag (it's in the Wiki, but that page could be read as 
suggesting that this tag is an alternative to mapping an amenity=parking, not 
an addition to it). Or is

 entrance=parking

better? The Wiki doesn't mention 'parking' as a value for the 'entrance' tag, 
but maybe that doesn't matter.


Presumably an

 access=destination

tag will also usually be appropriate on the the school car-park?

--
Cheers,
John

___
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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Stuart Reynolds]

I’m thinking that while we are reviewing the schools, it would be a good idea 
to add the Edubase reference into a Ref tag for each school boundary polygon, 
to make it easier to track in future. Is that reference stable enough?
If we think that it is a good idea, perhaps we could make it part of an agreed 
“do minimum” for this project. For example:


  *   draw and tag the boundary polygon with a minimum of
 *   amenity=school
 *   name=*
 *   ref=*
  *   add entrances
 *   at least one entrance=main
 *   barrier=gate where appropriate - I would have thought most schools 
will have gates
 *   others entrances where appropriate
  *   then optionally, but preferably, draw the school buildings and tag 
building=school.

I know we don’t want to be prescriptive, but it would certainly help people 
(like myself) who haven't participated in projects before ’t there was a 
(readily achievable) level of expectation as to what involvement in the project 
meant.

Personally I have been adding in the buildings, but I haven’t been worrying 
(for now) about playing fields and the like - I’ll go back and revisit those if 
I have time. But there are a surprising number of missing schools so I have 
been looking to get those in first.

Cheers
Stuart



On 3 Jan 2016, at 21:54, Rob Nickerson 
> wrote:

Hi all,

Some great ideas and tools already shared and only January 3rd!

This made me think I should set up a wiki page but I have been beaten to it. 
I've expanded on the page to add links to all the resources being discussed 
here. Page at:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects

Rob

p.s. Big thank you to our wiki system admins who have now added the 
VisualEditor to the wiki. This makes it much easier to edit the wiki so no 
excuses for not keeping the pages up to date :-)
___
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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi all,

Some great ideas and tools already shared and only January 3rd!

This made me think I should set up a wiki page but I have been beaten to
it. I've expanded on the page to add links to all the resources being
discussed here. Page at:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Projects

*Rob*

p.s. Big thank you to our wiki system admins who have now added the
VisualEditor to the wiki. This makes it much easier to edit the wiki so no
excuses for not keeping the pages up to date :-)
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Dave F.]

Hi BZ

I put all other data relating to the whole school (name, address, 
website etc) on the boundary way. Many organisations such as schools, 
universities & hospitals etc have distinctive departments. These can be 
identified by adding names to each building.


Dave F.

On 03/01/2016 13:40, Bogus Zaba wrote:

On 02/01/16 15:24, Dave F. wrote:

On 02/01/2016 12:51, Brian Prangle wrote:

That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools
which is 84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as
nodes only. It would be great to have these as polygons and
associated buildings. It would also be great to have close to 100%
coverage.

This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or
newer data, it's welcome.


 From experience I would say schools are the entities that are most
likely to be mapped with duplicating nodes & polygons, so I'm unsure
if those numbers are truly representative. I've even noticed that
individual school buildings are occasionally tagged as amenity=school
causing a similar problem to Cambridge University..

The boundary polygon should include not only the buildings &
playgrounds, but recreation grounds/sports pitches

---

Local school here (Denbighshire, Wales) has been shown as a boundary
polygon with tag amenity=school and the main school building is a
polygon within the boundary tagged as building=school. Both polygons
have a name tag which is the same (Ysgol Hiraddug).

Is this the right way to tag?




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[SK53]

Generally I will place the name tag on the school grounds and not on the
buildings. This allows individual buildings to be given names, if they have
them: e.g., Science Block, Nursery.

A couple of complications:

   - Campus sites: several schools share facilities, particularly playing
   fields. The most complex one I know of is in Northwich
   . The shared
   playing fields are mapped as leisure=recreation_ground with the individual
   schools now being mapped as polygons, but sometimes it is difficult without
   good local knowledge to separate out distinct institutions.
   - School Recreation Ground also available out of school hour, either as
   a local rec., or in association with a sports centre co-located with the
   school. In this case I think it can be left to the mapper's discretion as
   to whether the school polygon includes the playing field or not.

Jerry

On 3 January 2016 at 13:40, Bogus Zaba  wrote:

> On 02/01/16 15:24, Dave F. wrote:
> > On 02/01/2016 12:51, Brian Prangle wrote:
> >> That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools
> >> which is 84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as
> >> nodes only. It would be great to have these as polygons and
> >> associated buildings. It would also be great to have close to 100%
> >> coverage.
> >>
> >> This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or
> >> newer data, it's welcome.
> >>
> >
> > From experience I would say schools are the entities that are most
> > likely to be mapped with duplicating nodes & polygons, so I'm unsure
> > if those numbers are truly representative. I've even noticed that
> > individual school buildings are occasionally tagged as amenity=school
> > causing a similar problem to Cambridge University..
> >
> > The boundary polygon should include not only the buildings &
> > playgrounds, but recreation grounds/sports pitches
> >
> > ---
> Local school here (Denbighshire, Wales) has been shown as a boundary
> polygon with tag amenity=school and the main school building is a
> polygon within the boundary tagged as building=school. Both polygons
> have a name tag which is the same (Ysgol Hiraddug).
>
> Is this the right way to tag?
>
> --
> Dr Bogumil N Zaba
>
>
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Bogus Zaba]

On 02/01/16 15:24, Dave F. wrote:
> On 02/01/2016 12:51, Brian Prangle wrote:
>> That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools
>> which is 84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as
>> nodes only. It would be great to have these as polygons and
>> associated buildings. It would also be great to have close to 100%
>> coverage.
>>
>> This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or
>> newer data, it's welcome.
>>
>
> From experience I would say schools are the entities that are most
> likely to be mapped with duplicating nodes & polygons, so I'm unsure
> if those numbers are truly representative. I've even noticed that
> individual school buildings are occasionally tagged as amenity=school
> causing a similar problem to Cambridge University..
>
> The boundary polygon should include not only the buildings &
> playgrounds, but recreation grounds/sports pitches
>
> ---
Local school here (Denbighshire, Wales) has been shown as a boundary
polygon with tag amenity=school and the main school building is a
polygon within the boundary tagged as building=school. Both polygons
have a name tag which is the same (Ysgol Hiraddug).

Is this the right way to tag?

-- 
Dr Bogumil N Zaba


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Bogus Zaba]

Thanks. That makes sense and avoids the name duplication.


On 03/01/16 14:31, SK53 wrote:
> Generally I will place the name tag on the school grounds and not on
> the buildings. This allows individual buildings to be given names, if
> they have them: e.g., Science Block, Nursery.
>
> A couple of complications:
>
>   * Campus sites: several schools share facilities, particularly
> playing fields. The most complex one I know of is in Northwich
> . The shared
> playing fields are mapped as leisure=recreation_ground with the
> individual schools now being mapped as polygons, but sometimes it
> is difficult without good local knowledge to separate out distinct
> institutions.
>   * School Recreation Ground also available out of school hour, either
> as a local rec., or in association with a sports centre co-located
> with the school. In this case I think it can be left to the
> mapper's discretion as to whether the school polygon includes the
> playing field or not.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> On 3 January 2016 at 13:40, Bogus Zaba  > wrote:
>
> On 02/01/16 15:24, Dave F. wrote:
> > On 02/01/2016 12:51, Brian Prangle wrote:
> >> That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools
> >> which is 84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as
> >> nodes only. It would be great to have these as polygons and
> >> associated buildings. It would also be great to have close to 100%
> >> coverage.
> >>
> >> This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or
> >> newer data, it's welcome.
> >>
> >
> > From experience I would say schools are the entities that are most
> > likely to be mapped with duplicating nodes & polygons, so I'm unsure
> > if those numbers are truly representative. I've even noticed that
> > individual school buildings are occasionally tagged as
> amenity=school
> > causing a similar problem to Cambridge University..
> >
> > The boundary polygon should include not only the buildings &
> > playgrounds, but recreation grounds/sports pitches
> >
> > ---
> Local school here (Denbighshire, Wales) has been shown as a boundary
> polygon with tag amenity=school and the main school building is a
> polygon within the boundary tagged as building=school. Both polygons
> have a name tag which is the same (Ysgol Hiraddug).
>
> Is this the right way to tag?
>
> --
> Dr Bogumil N Zaba
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>


-- 
Dr Bogumil N Zaba


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 2 January 2016 at 12:51, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> Happy New Year! (and Happy New Mapping Year!) The first Quarterly Project
> for 2016 is now under way and is Schools. There are really two strands to
> this project.
>
> The first is to remotely (armchai)r map and get an increase in coverage of
> the number of schools
>
> The latest government data is for January 2012 which shows 24,372 schools in
> England (including nursery schools, state-funded primary schools,
> state-funded secondary schools, special schools, pupil referral units and
> independent schools.)

Since most of the code could be re-used from what I already do for
Post Offices, I've put together a quick comparison tool to compare the
Edubase data for England with what's currently in OSM:
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/progress/

It's a bit rough at the moment. I'm currently only using the data for
England, and only fetching OSM *ways* tagged with amenity=school .
There are no markers on the slippy map yet either, and the matching
process is rather basic. With luck, I'll have some time to make some
improvements in the next couple of weeks. In the mean time, the lists
of non-matching items will hopefully still be useful to people.

One caveat though -- I'm not completely sure that the Edubase data is
(or should be) available under an OSM-compatible Licence (the OGL in
this case). In particular the addresses and postcodes may be tainted
by AddressBase. Until the licence is confirmed, we should avoid using
Edubase data directly to add or edit Schools in OSM. There should be
sufficient other sources available though.

Best wishes,

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Colin Smale]

Great idea Robert! 

Any idea why it is not matching Gravesend Grammar School (at DA12 2PR)
which is in OSM with amenity=school on way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142625579 ? I have noticed several
other schools in Gravesend and surroundings which as far as I can see
are in OSM and not being picked up by your scan.

//colin 

On 2016-01-03 19:43, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

> On 2 January 2016 at 12:51, Brian Prangle  wrote: 
> 
>> Happy New Year! (and Happy New Mapping Year!) The first Quarterly Project
>> for 2016 is now under way and is Schools. There are really two strands to
>> this project.
>> 
>> The first is to remotely (armchai)r map and get an increase in coverage of
>> the number of schools
>> 
>> The latest government data is for January 2012 which shows 24,372 schools in
>> England (including nursery schools, state-funded primary schools,
>> state-funded secondary schools, special schools, pupil referral units and
>> independent schools.)
> 
> Since most of the code could be re-used from what I already do for
> Post Offices, I've put together a quick comparison tool to compare the
> Edubase data for England with what's currently in OSM:
> http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/progress/
> 
> It's a bit rough at the moment. I'm currently only using the data for
> England, and only fetching OSM *ways* tagged with amenity=school .
> There are no markers on the slippy map yet either, and the matching
> process is rather basic. With luck, I'll have some time to make some
> improvements in the next couple of weeks. In the mean time, the lists
> of non-matching items will hopefully still be useful to people.
> 
> One caveat though -- I'm not completely sure that the Edubase data is
> (or should be) available under an OSM-compatible Licence (the OGL in
> this case). In particular the addresses and postcodes may be tainted
> by AddressBase. Until the licence is confirmed, we should avoid using
> Edubase data directly to add or edit Schools in OSM. There should be
> sufficient other sources available though.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Robert.
 ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 3 January 2016 at 19:04, Colin Smale  wrote:
> Any idea why it is not matching Gravesend Grammar School (at DA12 2PR) which
> is in OSM with amenity=school on way
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142625579 ? I have noticed several other
> schools in Gravesend and surroundings which as far as I can see are in OSM
> and not being picked up by your scan.

If you look in the first table, you'll see that Edubase school 118987
"St Joseph's Convent Independent Preparatory School" has been matched
with OSM way 142625579. As I said, the matching is rather simplistic.
I currently just go through each Edubase entry in turn and take the
closest as-yet-unmatched OSM amenity=school object to the postcode
centroid. Once an Edubase entry has taken an OSM object, that OSM
object is no longer a potential matching candidate for any other
Edubase Entries. I can probably improve the matching by preferring an
exact name match if one exists. Fuzzy name matching may be a bit
harder.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Rob Nickerson]

>I've imported a current GB extract with osm2pgsql I find:
>
>
>
>Bye
>Frederik
>

Good analysis there Frederik. Are you able to share the outputs so that
others can use it to help the mapping efforts? A slippy map or maproulette
task would be good but maybe just the raw data to get us started if your
busy.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Colin Smale]

Aah, I see... I didn't expect to find it there! St Josephs is in OSM,
but as a node [1], which are not included as yet. I think some kind of
matching on the name is probably going to be important. Many schools are
also tagged with address data, so addr:postcode may also be a good
matching key - possibly even tighter than the name, given that schools
probably have their own postcode, and that the school names can change. 

//colin

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/529528620 

On 2016-01-03 20:11, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

> On 3 January 2016 at 19:04, Colin Smale  wrote: 
> 
>> Any idea why it is not matching Gravesend Grammar School (at DA12 2PR) which
>> is in OSM with amenity=school on way
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142625579 ? I have noticed several other
>> schools in Gravesend and surroundings which as far as I can see are in OSM
>> and not being picked up by your scan.
> 
> If you look in the first table, you'll see that Edubase school 118987
> "St Joseph's Convent Independent Preparatory School" has been matched
> with OSM way 142625579. As I said, the matching is rather simplistic.
> I currently just go through each Edubase entry in turn and take the
> closest as-yet-unmatched OSM amenity=school object to the postcode
> centroid. Once an Edubase entry has taken an OSM object, that OSM
> object is no longer a potential matching candidate for any other
> Edubase Entries. I can probably improve the matching by preferring an
> exact name match if one exists. Fuzzy name matching may be a bit
> harder.
> 
> Robert.
 ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[SK53]

Hi Rob et al.,

I've created a quick umap instance

showing school points within a school polygon.

If anyone can tell me how to remove the bit of html which makes the url to
the polygon not work, do let me know.

Regards,

Jerry

On 3 January 2016 at 17:45, Rob Nickerson  wrote:

> >I've imported a current GB extract with osm2pgsql I find:
> >
> >
> >
> >Bye
> >Frederik
> >
>
> Good analysis there Frederik. Are you able to share the outputs so that
> others can use it to help the mapping efforts? A slippy map or maproulette
> task would be good but maybe just the raw data to get us started if your
> busy.
>
> Cheers,
> *Rob*
>
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 01/03/2016 06:45 PM, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Good analysis there Frederik. Are you able to share the outputs so that
> others can use it to help the mapping efforts? A slippy map or
> maproulette task would be good but maybe just the raw data to get us
> started if your busy.

I'm afraid I can't offer more than the raw data - three CSV files, one
with all points contained in other stuff, one with all polygons
contained in other stuff, and one with all stuff that is somehow near
other stuff. For the polygon IDs, a negative ID points to a relation.

http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/gb_schools.zip

Bye
Frederik
-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

[Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Brian Prangle]

Happy New Year! (and Happy New Mapping Year!) The first Quarterly Project
for 2016 is now under way and is Schools. There are really two strands to
this project.

The first is to remotely (armchai)r map and get an increase in coverage of
the number of schools

The latest government data is for January 2012 which shows 24,372 schools
in England (including nursery schools, state-funded primary schools,
state-funded secondary schools, special schools, pupil referral units and
independent schools.)

For Wales that data is from January 2015 : 13 Nursery Schools; 1,330
primary schools;6 middle schools;207 secondary schools;and 37 special
schools.

For Scotland data is from September2011 and shows 2,553 pre-schools, 2,081
primary schools, 367 secondary schools and 158 special schools.

For Northern Ireland data is from October 2015 and shows 96 nursery
schools; 827 primary schools; 202 secondary schools and 39 special schools.
Additionally there are 14 independent schools and 1 hospital school.

That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools which is
84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as nodes only. It
would be great to have these as polygons and associated buildings. It would
also be great to have close to 100% coverage.

This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or newer
data, it's welcome.

Schools can be remotely mapped (armchair mapping) by using Ordnance Survey
OpenData StreetView(OSSV) data where school buildings are individually
identified (but not always named). This data needs to be cross-checked with
Bing aerial imagery which can often show OSSV schools as either having been
demolished with a resultant brownfield site or housing redevelopment, or
with buildings having been demolished and rebuilt in a new configuration.
Often where a school site has ceased to exist, a completely new school site
has been constructed nearby.

The second strand is for those who prefer surveying: existing school names
change (e.g change to Academy Status, amalgamations); there will schools in
OSM with no name, and with the advent of free schools, new ones will be
appearing constantly.

So there's plenty to do over the next few months!

There's a progress table

already established. You'll need to access the sheet marked Schools
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi,

There is also a mapzen map that helps identify schools marked only by a
node. The map is a bit clunky so someone may be able to come up with
something better using umap. As Brian noted, we have over 6000 schools
tagged just with a node.
https://mapzen.com/blog/targeted-editing-school-polygons

^ The above link also provides a nice graphic reminding us how to map
schools in detail (the area is the full school grounds).

The gov.uk data for England looks great. A couple of observations from me:

* It includes closed schools in a separate worksheet! It would be great if
someone could compare this to OSM data to see if we have any inaccurate
data.
* The data is very rich - do we want to start tagging establishment type,
sixth form, etc? And if so, how?

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Dave F.]

On 02/01/2016 12:51, Brian Prangle wrote:
That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools 
which is 84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as nodes 
only. It would be great to have these as polygons and associated 
buildings. It would also be great to have close to 100% coverage.


This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or 
newer data, it's welcome.




From experience I would say schools are the entities that are most 
likely to be mapped with duplicating nodes & polygons, so I'm unsure if 
those numbers are truly representative. I've even noticed that 
individual school buildings are occasionally tagged as amenity=school 
causing a similar problem to Cambridge University..


The boundary polygon should include not only the buildings & 
playgrounds, but recreation grounds/sports pitches


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[David Woolley]

On 02/01/16 12:51, Brian Prangle wrote:

That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools which
is 84.1% coverage in OSM.


One possible reason for the shortfall would be where an infants and 
junior school, or a middle and upper school share a site.  When armchair 
mapping, it may not be possible to resolve the the two.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap)]

Hi,

At a time of great policy change like this, it would be hard to get every 
single school in the UK mapped, but I could try for my local area.

Usually, new schools open in September and old ones close in July, which might 
help.

Antje

https://openstreetmap.org/user/Amaroussi

> On 2 Jan 2016, at 12:51, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> 
> Happy New Year! (and Happy New Mapping Year!) The first Quarterly Project for 
> 2016 is now under way and is Schools. There are really two strands to this 
> project.
> 
> The first is to remotely (armchai)r map and get an increase in coverage of 
> the number of schools
> 
> The latest government data is for January 2012 which shows 24,372 schools in 
> England (including nursery schools, state-funded primary schools, 
> state-funded secondary schools, special schools, pupil referral units and 
> independent schools.)
> 
> For Wales that data is from January 2015 : 13 Nursery Schools; 1,330 primary 
> schools;6 middle schools;207 secondary schools;and 37 special schools.
> 
> For Scotland data is from September2011 and shows 2,553 pre-schools, 2,081 
> primary schools, 367 secondary schools and 158 special schools.
> 
> For Northern Ireland data is from October 2015 and shows 96 nursery schools; 
> 827 primary schools; 202 secondary schools and 39 special schools. 
> Additionally there are 14 independent schools and 1 hospital school.
> 
> That gives a total of 32,318 schools. Taginfo shows 27,191 schools which is 
> 84.1% coverage in OSM. However 6,348 are represented as nodes only. It would 
> be great to have these as polygons and associated buildings. It would also be 
> great to have close to 100% coverage.
> 
> This data comes from a cursory web search. If anyone has better or newer 
> data, it's welcome.
> 
> Schools can be remotely mapped (armchair mapping) by using Ordnance Survey 
> OpenData StreetView(OSSV) data where school buildings are individually 
> identified (but not always named). This data needs to be cross-checked with 
> Bing aerial imagery which can often show OSSV schools as either having been 
> demolished with a resultant brownfield site or housing redevelopment, or with 
> buildings having been demolished and rebuilt in a new configuration. Often 
> where a school site has ceased to exist, a completely new school site has 
> been constructed nearby.
> 
> The second strand is for those who prefer surveying: existing school names 
> change (e.g change to Academy Status, amalgamations); there will schools in 
> OSM with no name, and with the advent of free schools, new ones will be 
> appearing constantly.
> 
> So there's plenty to do over the next few months!
> 
> There's a progress table 
> 
>  already established. You'll need to access the sheet marked Schools
> 
> ___
> 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] 2016 first quarterly project:Schools

[Rob Nickerson]

Surely that is where the benefit of a community really helps. With
government data keeping up to date then we should be able to track the
changes quite easily, georeference the address in order to calculate the
rough location and then ask our local mappers to help with on the ground
surveys. A nice simple QA tool would be of huge benefit if anyone is up for
the challenge :-)

The surveys will require a large number of engaged mappers spread over the
country. If we struggle then it reinforces the ambition of the new
OpenStreetMap UK group. The quote about "a mapper in every town" springs to
mind again!

*Rob*

>Hi,
>
>At a time of great policy change like this, it would be hard to get every
single school in the UK mapped, but I could try for my local area.
>
>Usually, new schools open in September and old ones close in July, which
might help.
>
>Antje
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb