Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Giorgio,

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I checked again, I hope it's better now .
>
> Many thanks again for your help!!
>

It seems fine to me now! :-)

Bye,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,

2018-02-22 14:41 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> It's likely because one of the two building parts must be a multi polygon.
>
>>
> It is better but I still see some issues:
> * A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
> You should use two building:part tags.
> * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
> * There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
> should be more than one).
> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
> separate building.
> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
> building is tagged as different building.
>

I checked again, I hope it's better now .

Many thanks again for your help!!

Giorgio
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Giorgio,

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 9:06 AM, Giorgio Limonta <
giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:

> * A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
>> You should use two building:part tags.
>
> * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
>
>
> done thanks
>

You removed the building:part tags. It's fine for me but you had the data
about them.

* There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
>> should be more than one).
>> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
>> separate building.
>>
>
The building outline (the one with the building tag) is now fine. But one
of the building:part - the one with another building part inside - must be
a multi polygon.

This problem is also present in Chiesa della Beata Vergine: one of the
building:part must be a multi polygon and not an area because it has
another building:part inside.


> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
>> building is tagged as different building.
>
>
> I made a general check of all the buildings, please review them.
>

Looking with sat images it seems you forgot (I maybe wrong because I can't
see original data and I cannot verify on site):
-50470 (the first building on the left in Via San Remigio, going into
Sabbioneta)

Bye,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,

* A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
> You should use two building:part tags.

* You should also add building=yes to bell towers.


done thanks

* There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
> should be more than one).
> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
> separate building.
> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
> building is tagged as different building.


I made a general check of all the buildings, please review them.

Thanks

Giorgio

2018-02-22 14:41 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Hi Giorgio,
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?
>>
>> For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
>>> is not the only one):
>>> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/
>>
>>
>> yes but that was a problematic one: if I creat two building parts and a
>> building feature that contains them, josm validator marks them as an error.
>> (perhaps for the particular shape). I solved by erasing the lower part that
>> surrounded the main building.
>>
>
> It's likely because one of the two building parts must be a multi polygon.
>
> (and it is not the only one)
>>
>>
>> I checked again, I hope it's better now
>>
>
> It is better but I still see some issues:
> * A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
> You should use two building:part tags.
> * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
> * There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
> should be more than one).
> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
> separate building.
> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
> building is tagged as different building.
>
> Bye,
>
> Andrea
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi!

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 22. Feb 2018, at 14:41, Andrea Musuruane  wrote:
> >
> > * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
>
>
> I would suggest building=bell_tower
>
>
Actually in the wiki there is written to add building=yes in case of free
standing bell tower:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dbell_tower

BR,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 22. Feb 2018, at 14:41, Andrea Musuruane  wrote:
> 
> * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.


I would suggest building=bell_tower


Cheers,
Martin 

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

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Giorgio,

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?
>
> For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
>> is not the only one):
>> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/
>
>
> yes but that was a problematic one: if I creat two building parts and a
> building feature that contains them, josm validator marks them as an error.
> (perhaps for the particular shape). I solved by erasing the lower part that
> surrounded the main building.
>

It's likely because one of the two building parts must be a multi polygon.

(and it is not the only one)
>
>
> I checked again, I hope it's better now
>

It is better but I still see some issues:
* A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
You should use two building:part tags.
* You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
* There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
should be more than one).
* In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
separate building.
*The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single building
is tagged as different building.

Bye,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,

There is still an historic=monument.


Sorry, done.


If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
> way:
> amenity=community_centre
> community_centre=parish_hall
> denomination=catholic
> religion=christian


Ok I fixed


The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
> your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/


I tried to make it clearer, please review them.


Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?

For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
> is not the only one):
> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/


yes but that was a problematic one: if I creat two building parts and a
building feature that contains them, josm validator marks them as an error.
(perhaps for the particular shape). I solved by erasing the lower part that
surrounded the main building.


(and it is not the only one)


I checked again, I hope it's better now


Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
> this review soon :-)


thanks for your patience ;)

bye

2018-02-16 18:16 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Hi Giorgio,
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
>>>
>>
> There is still an historic=monument.
>
>
>> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
>>> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-Febru
>>> ary/062020.html
>>> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions
>>> are welcome.
>>
>>
>> Done thanks
>>
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
> way:
>
> amenity=community_centre
> community_centre=parish_hall
> denomination=catholic
> religion=christian
>
>
>> What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
>>> will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
>>> features and see if they are tagged correctly.
>>> An (old) example is the following:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging
>>
>>
>> Yes my tagging plan it's very simple because the import information are
>> poor. But I will improve the information after the import with a "classic"
>> mapping approach ;)
>>
>
> The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
> your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/
>
>
>> About 3D buildings
>>> There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
>>> building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.
>>> Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
>>> outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
>>> name=*).
>>> If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts,
>>> you must place a building:part tag on each of them.
>>> Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
>>> overall building.
>>
>>
>> You right, I (think) understand that and I fixed the "not residential"
>> buildings
>>
>
> Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?
>
> For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
> is not the only one):
> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/
>
> It should have two building:part tags one for each different section of
> the house (now it only has one).
>
>
>> It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.
>>> Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these
>>> duplicate features.
>>> BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
>>> feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
>>> and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki
>>> /Teatro_all'Antica).
>>
>>
>> Yes, done.
>>
>
> You current OSM file has one duplicate node. You can find it with JOSM
> validator.
>
> Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
> this review soon :-)
>
> Bye,
>
> Andrea
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Giorgio,

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:

> You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
>>
>
There is still an historic=monument.


> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
>> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-
>> February/062020.html
>> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions
>> are welcome.
>
>
> Done thanks
>

If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
way:

amenity=community_centre
community_centre=parish_hall
denomination=catholic
religion=christian


> What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
>> will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
>> features and see if they are tagged correctly.
>> An (old) example is the following:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging
>
>
> Yes my tagging plan it's very simple because the import information are
> poor. But I will improve the information after the import with a "classic"
> mapping approach ;)
>

The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/


> About 3D buildings
>> There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
>> building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.
>> Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
>> outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
>> name=*).
>> If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts,
>> you must place a building:part tag on each of them.
>> Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
>> overall building.
>
>
> You right, I (think) understand that and I fixed the "not residential"
> buildings
>

Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?

For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
is not the only one):
https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/

It should have two building:part tags one for each different section of the
house (now it only has one).


> It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.
>> Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these duplicate
>> features.
>> BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
>> feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
>> and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (https://it.wikipedia.org/
>> wiki/Teatro_all'Antica).
>
>
> Yes, done.
>

You current OSM file has one duplicate node. You can find it with JOSM
validator.

Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
this review soon :-)

Bye,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Alessandro,

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Alessandro  wrote:

> Il 11/02/2018 20:34, Andrea Musuruane ha scritto:
>
> ..
>> BTW, no church has got a name tag. Will you add them? When?
>> 
>>
>>
> Hi,
> sorry, but I really don't see the point in not having the churches named.
> Is it mandatory in a import procedure?


Of course it is not mandatory. I made that question because nobody but
Giorgio can see the source data. Therefore I wondered if he forgot church
names (usually found in Municipal Open Data) or not. It seems church names
are not present. So they should be taken from current features (BTW they
currently do not follow Italian standards) during conflation.

Bye,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Alessandro]

Il 11/02/2018 20:34, Andrea Musuruane ha scritto:


..
BTW, no church has got a name tag. Will you add them? When?




Hi,
sorry, but I really don't see the point in not having the churches 
named. Is it mandatory in a import procedure?


It's ok going into all the details, but sometimes I feel, maybe wrongly, 
we're digging too deep, isn't it?


Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT

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

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,


> Hi Giorgio,
> I fixed some more spelling errors and other mistakes on the wiki page.
> Please review them.


Many thanks

Summarizing, OSM is authorized to derive works from the "Carta Tecnica
> Comunale" and to distribute them under the ODbL but you can't distribute
> the source data. If there's an argument against this, I believe it will be
> written in this ML.


yes...

Anyway the lack of the source data makes it impossible to verify the
> correct tagging. We have to trust your derived OSM file.




The OSM file has a source tag on each feature - please remove them. You'll
> tag the changeset with the source tag, not individual features.


Ok, done

You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-February/062020.html
> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions are
> welcome.


Done thanks

What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
> will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
> features and see if they are tagged correctly.
> An (old) example is the following:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging


Yes my tagging plan it's very simple because the import information are
poor. But I will improve the information after the import with a "classic"
mapping approach ;)

About 3D buildings
> There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
> building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.
> Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
> outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
> name=*).
> If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts, you
> must place a building:part tag on each of them.
> Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
> overall building.


You right, I (think) understand that and I fixed the "not residential"
buildings

BTW, no church has got a name tag. Will you add them? When?


After the import, when I will start to search more information with some
surveys (the import it's just the first step of our work)

It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.
> Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these duplicate
> features.
> BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
> feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
> and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (
> https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teatro_all'Antica).


Yes, done.

Thanks again Andrea for your support.

Giorgio

2018-02-11 20:34 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Hi Giorgio,
> I fixed some more spelling errors and other mistakes on the wiki page.
> Please review them.
>
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I am waiting clarification but I belive this doesn't stop the import (I
>> hope)
>>
>
> Summarizing, OSM is authorized to derive works from the "Carta Tecnica
> Comunale" and to distribute them under the ODbL but you can't distribute
> the source data. If there's an argument against this, I believe it will be
> written in this ML.
>
> Anyway the lack of the source data makes it impossible to verify the
> correct tagging. We have to trust your derived OSM file.
>
>
>> > The data still have some issue:
>>> >> - adjacent buildings that are not connected
>>> >> - a building has self-intersecting way
>>>
>>
>>
> The OSM file has a source tag on each feature - please remove them. You'll
> tag the changeset with the source tag, not individual features.
>
> You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
>
> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-
> February/062020.html
>
>
>> This has been discussed in the past in the talk-it ML.
>>> The tag man_made=campanile is documented in the wiki but is used only 791
>>> times. Moreover the picture refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is
>>> completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a
>>> campanile
>>> is man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower (used 10595 times). Even the
>>> man_made=campanile wiki page suggest to use this tagging.
>>
>>
>> Ok, at the beginning when I found "Campanile" I said "this is
>> perfect!!" and I haven't search further...
>>
>
> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions are
> welcome.
>
> What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
> will be places on 

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Giorgio,
I fixed some more spelling errors and other mistakes on the wiki page.
Please review them.

On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I am waiting clarification but I belive this doesn't stop the import (I
> hope)
>

Summarizing, OSM is authorized to derive works from the "Carta Tecnica
Comunale" and to distribute them under the ODbL but you can't distribute
the source data. If there's an argument against this, I believe it will be
written in this ML.

Anyway the lack of the source data makes it impossible to verify the
correct tagging. We have to trust your derived OSM file.


> > The data still have some issue:
>> >> - adjacent buildings that are not connected
>> >> - a building has self-intersecting way
>>
>
>
The OSM file has a source tag on each feature - please remove them. You'll
tag the changeset with the source tag, not individual features.

You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument

Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly tagging
an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-February/062020.html


> This has been discussed in the past in the talk-it ML.
>> The tag man_made=campanile is documented in the wiki but is used only 791
>> times. Moreover the picture refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is
>> completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a
>> campanile
>> is man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower (used 10595 times). Even the
>> man_made=campanile wiki page suggest to use this tagging.
>
>
> Ok, at the beginning when I found "Campanile" I said "this is
> perfect!!" and I haven't search further...
>

OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions are
welcome.

What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
features and see if they are tagged correctly.

An (old) example is the following:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging

[About 3D buildings]

> Your tagging is wrong. Look at the following example.
>> [image: Inline image 1]
>> This is a house. It is a single building. This also means you should have
>> only one building tag on the building outline.
>> But you made two buildings (i.e. with two building tags): one for the
>> lower
>> part (a multi polygon) and one for the higher part (a closed way). But
>> different parts must be tagged with building:part as explained on
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings
>
>
> Yes now I have understud and you are absolutely right, I fixed that and
> the other similar cases (almost all the multipolygon).
>
>
It seems you didn't understand it completely.

For example, look at the following building (a church):
https://postimg.org/image/ukj6d5j45/

There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.

Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
name=*).

If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts, you
must place a building:part tag on each of them.

Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
overall building.

BTW, no church has got a name tag. Will you add them? When?


Right now the plan is "The Topology Checker QGIS Plugin and the Josm
>
> validator to prevent most problems before uploading the data."
>
> Please add something about what you will do *after* the import. For
>
> example, you can use again the JOSM validator (on the whole OSM data and
>
> not only on the buildings) and/or use Osmose.
>
>
> Ok
>

You still have to update the wiki page about this.


> BTW, how will you merge POI on nodes and POI on buildings? For example the
>
> Teatro Olimpico and the townhall?
>
>
> "Teatro Olimpico" is wrong both in the denomination and in the
> localization. In order to not delete them I could keep both , but it could
> be redundant .
>

It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.

Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these duplicate
features.

BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teatro_all'Antica).

Bye,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

 On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Andrea Musuruane 
wrote:

Hi Andrea,

I understand this is your first import (and I definitely hope it's not your
> last!). It's really difficult to get things right the first time. Imports
> are not easy tasks - there are so much things to pay attention to.
> I find your goal valuable. Having buildings for Sabbioneta (BTW, it's nice
> place I visited some moons ago :-)) in OSM is definitely welcome.


Yes I was joking, really thank you for your time. I hope our work could
help future import processes.


> > The "Schedule" chapter is missing.
> >>
> >
> Fine, but English can be improved:



*The Municipality of Sabbioneta released a written permission in December
> 2017 stating it allows works derived from the "Carta Tecnica Comunale" to
> be distributed under the ODbL. My aim is to upload building data by the end
> of February 2018. *
>
> > "Import Type" section in "Import Data" chapter is missing. You should
> >> likely say your import is a one-time import, you won't use automated
> >> scripts, all the tags will be entered manually and data will be
> imported in
> >> the OSM database using JOSM.
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope that everything is clearer now
> >
> >
> Yes, much better, thanks.
> English can be improved:
> *This is a one-time import. The dataset will be uploaded as a single
> changeset without using an automated script. All the tags will be entered
> manually and the dataset will be uploaded using JOSM.*


Done thank you

> You should upload the original dataset.
> >
> >
> >
> > I can't. the Municipality license it's just to extract the data and share
> > throught Osm.
> >
> >
> I think it's fine but, if possible, I'd like to have a more authoritative
> (i.e. legal) opinion about this: we can't see the source data set but we're
> allowed to derive works from it.



> "Data license" should link to a text copy of the ODbL.
> >> "Type of license" should be "ODbL".
> >
> >
> >
> > Done (I hope)
> >
> >
> This is strictly linked with the previous point.
> *Data license:* *proprietary* (owned by the Municipality of Sabbioneta)
> [...]
> *ODbL Compliance verified:* Municipality of Sabbioneta has agreed to
> license *derived* data under the ODbL
> .


I am waiting clarification but I belive this doesn't stop the import (I
hope)

> The data still have some issue:
> >> - adjacent buildings that are not connected
> >> - a building has self-intersecting ways
> >
> >
> > Fix it, sorry Josm marked as Advertising and I ignored them.
> >
> >
> JOSM validator still shows two warnings you must address.


Yes now


>
> > - churches are tagged with "denominati" (it should be denomination)
> >
> >
> > Yes sorry was a mistake depending to the shp field name limitation...
> >
> >
> Now the OSM file has both the "denominati"  and " "denomination" tags :-(


Yes sorry...  

>
> > - bell towers are tagged with man_made=campanile (shouldn't it be
> >> man_made=tower + tower:type=bell_tower?) and without the building tag.
> See
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dbell_tower
> >
> >
> > I found it in the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org
> > /wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcampanile
> >
> >
> This has been discussed in the past in the talk-it ML.
> The tag man_made=campanile is documented in the wiki but is used only 791
> times. Moreover the picture refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is
> completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a campanile
> is man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower (used 10595 times). Even the
> man_made=campanile wiki page suggest to use this tagging.


Ok, at the beginning when I found "Campanile" I said "this is
perfect!!" and I haven't search further...

> some buildings are split in different parts (still tagged as building=*)
> >> and you assign different heights to them. I'm not an expert about this
> but
> >> it seems this is not the right procedure. Please read
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height#Height_of_buildings and
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings
> >
> >
> > Was identified all single buildings that have different height to add in
> a
> > future mapping phase other tag to improve the detail map (level, color,
> > roof_,shape, etc.). That was made with a manually split procedure but I
> > have splited only the building (not the building part).
> >
> >
> Your tagging is wrong. Look at the following example.
> [image: Inline image 1]
> This is a house. It is a single building. This also means you should have
> only one building tag on the building outline.
> But you made two buildings (i.e. with two building tags): one for the lower
> part (a multi polygon) and one for the higher part (a closed way). But
> different parts must be tagged with building:part as explained on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings


Yes now I have understud and you are absolutely right, I fixed that and the
other