Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Voter records are a good idea. And business registration records / business tax records also. I think getting the business addresses is going to be the harder task. But maybe if we merge data from multiple sources we can get a decent portion of it. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) calvin.metc...@state.ma.us wrote: To suplimnett it you could use the voter file, it'll have all the residential addresses, while not usefull on its own it'll give you fairly acurate ranges for residential streets. in america its public domain, getting it can be tricky and usually involves requesting it from towns Sent with Verizon Mobile Email ---Original Message--- From: Anthony o...@inbox.org Sent: 11/14/2011 9:36 pm To: Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports? On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: The parcel data is a superset of address data... Not when there's more than one address to a parcel, which around here unfortunately is a common occurrence in exactly the places where address information is most useful (strip malls and such). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
just an FYI--some states have laws limiting who can access voter data and/or what purposes the data can be used for (usually related to elections/campaigning) On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Voter records are a good idea. And business registration records / business tax records also. I think getting the business addresses is going to be the harder task. But maybe if we merge data from multiple sources we can get a decent portion of it. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) calvin.metc...@state.ma.us wrote: To suplimnett it you could use the voter file, it'll have all the residential addresses, while not usefull on its own it'll give you fairly acurate ranges for residential streets. in america its public domain, getting it can be tricky and usually involves requesting it from towns Sent with Verizon Mobile Email ---Original Message--- From: Anthony o...@inbox.org Sent: 11/14/2011 9:36 pm To: Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports? On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: The parcel data is a superset of address data... Not when there's more than one address to a parcel, which around here unfortunately is a common occurrence in exactly the places where address information is most useful (strip malls and such). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: The parcel data is a superset of address data... Not when there's more than one address to a parcel, which around here unfortunately is a common occurrence in exactly the places where address information is most useful (strip malls and such). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
To suplimnett it you could use the voter file, it'll have all the residential addresses, while not usefull on its own it'll give you fairly acurate ranges for residential streets. in america its public domain, getting it can be tricky and usually involves requesting it from towns Sent with Verizon Mobile Email ---Original Message--- From: Anthony o...@inbox.org Sent: 11/14/2011 9:36 pm To: Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports? On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: The parcel data is a superset of address data... Not when there's more than one address to a parcel, which around here unfortunately is a common occurrence in exactly the places where address information is most useful (strip malls and such). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/10/2011 04:22 AM, Anthony wrote: On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Steven Johnsonsejohns...@gmail.com wrote: The Census Bureau, through their partnerships and liaisons with state local govt, are acutely aware of the need and importance of address data. They are in fact open to finding ways to make the data available and still protect the privacy of individuals. It will likely take a while to get a change in policy, stand up some mechanism to provide data, create protocols for privacy protection, etc. but the fact that they're seriously considering these changes is progress. Until that happens, I encourage you to look into parcel data. It is becoming more widely available, and is of very high quality (governments want their taxes). Zillow, Redfin and Google are all over this data. http://www.ccmap.us/Details.asp?Product=134492 http://www.acgov.org/gis.htm http://assessor.lacounty.gov/extranet/outsidesales/price.aspx http://www.alamance-nc.com/d/gis/gis-downloads.html The parcel data is a superset of address data... and (remember that bit about taxes) far more up to date than TIGER. -Bryce NB: In California there is a law that prohibits publication of a public official's name and address together: many gis departments punt and remove /all/ name information rather than violate that law, despite the fact that ownership data and property transfers are public records. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/12/2011 5:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Would be nice to see some work towards validating and integrating the 2010 TIGER data into OSM. It's bound to be a huge improvement over the 2000 data. I've been doing this on a small scale for Mapdust bugs and all the new subdivisions in my county - not all counties have updated data in 2010. But many do, and it's quite an improvement. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: The Census Bureau, through their partnerships and liaisons with state local govt, are acutely aware of the need and importance of address data. They are in fact open to finding ways to make the data available and still protect the privacy of individuals. It will likely take a while to get a change in policy, stand up some mechanism to provide data, create protocols for privacy protection, etc. but the fact that they're seriously considering these changes is progress. The problem is not the policies, the problem is the law. If the problem were the policies, then an FOIA request would work. A list of all addresses does not violate the privacy of individuals. If that were all the law said, then I would try the request. But the law goes further than saying the Census Bureau cannot violate the privacy of individuals. It says the Census Bureau cannot distribute raw data reported by or on behalf of individuals. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Yaa, a FOIA request is very unlikely to yield results. There is a glimmer of hope, though. State and local governments have been asking the Census Bureau for their address data (Master Address File) for years. The Census Bureau, through their partnerships and liaisons with state local govt, are acutely aware of the need and importance of address data. They are in fact open to finding ways to make the data available and still protect the privacy of individuals. It will likely take a while to get a change in policy, stand up some mechanism to provide data, create protocols for privacy protection, etc. but the fact that they're seriously considering these changes is progress. -- SEJ -- twitter: @geomantic -- skype: sejohnson8 Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. -- Einstein On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 22:55, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Any idea where I would send the request? http://www.census.gov/po/www/foia/foiaweb.htm Good luck. Census will fight the request. Earlier comments about Title XIII apply. Based on that Supreme Court ruling, and the actual text of the law, I'm not going to bother. Thank you, though. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Doubt very seriously a FOIA request would work. Since the data are subject to Title XIII restrictions, it will likely take an act of Congress to make them available. Sent via telepathy. On Nov 5, 2011, at 17:13, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote: As long as we have all of the addresses, we could use satellite data to align them with houses. Is this the type of data we have in TIGER? It isn't, but I wonder whether or not a FOIA request for a list of all addresses (*without* geolocation information) would be possible. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Doubt very seriously a FOIA request would work. Since the data are subject to Title XIII restrictions, it will likely take an act of Congress to make them available. What exactly are the restrictions? I don't see how a list of all addresses, without any additional information, is a privacy issue. The fact of the matter is such a list *is already published by the USPS*, but *that* version of it isn't public domain. I'm tempted to give it a try, and even appeal if my request gets denied. Any idea where I would send the request? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Doubt very seriously a FOIA request would work. Since the data are subject to Title XIII restrictions, it will likely take an act of Congress to make them available. What exactly are the restrictions? I don't see how a list of all addresses, without any additional information, is a privacy issue. The fact of the matter is such a list *is already published by the USPS*, but *that* version of it isn't public domain. I'm tempted to give it a try, and even appeal if my request gets denied. Any idea where I would send the request? Actually my biggest worry is that they'll approve the request, and then tell me it's going to cost tens of thousands of dollars in fees to get it. Maybe I'll start with just a small portion of the state. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Hmm... Baldridge v Shapiro, a Supreme Court ruling: The unambiguous language of the confidentiality provisions of the Census Act -- focusing on the information or data that constitutes the statistical computation -- as well as the Act's legislative history, indicates that Congress contemplated that raw data reported by or on behalf of individuals, not just the identity of the individuals, was to be held confidential, and not available for disclosure. The master address list sought by Essex County is part of the raw census data intended by Congress to be protected under the Act. And under the Act's clear language, it is not relevant that municipalities seeking data will use it only for statistical purposes. This case was over something a little different...but that's some strong dicta. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Any idea where I would send the request? http://www.census.gov/po/www/foia/foiaweb.htm Good luck. Census will fight the request. Earlier comments about Title XIII apply. Incidentally, what you are requesting is the MAF, or Master Address File. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Any idea where I would send the request? http://www.census.gov/po/www/foia/foiaweb.htm Good luck. Census will fight the request. Earlier comments about Title XIII apply. Based on that Supreme Court ruling, and the actual text of the law, I'm not going to bother. Thank you, though. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote: As long as we have all of the addresses, we could use satellite data to align them with houses. Is this the type of data we have in TIGER? It isn't, but I wonder whether or not a FOIA request for a list of all addresses (*without* geolocation information) would be possible. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/4/2011 1:04 AM, Val Kartchner wrote: As long as we have all of the addresses, we could use satellite data to align them with houses. Is this the type of data we have in TIGER? No, TIGER lists all of the addresses, but adds a large fudge factor to comply with privacy laws. TIGER data alone is not enough to allow reconstruction of the house numbers manually from satellite data, assuming that all buildings would be visible through the tree cover. In fact on my block, the TIGER numbers are backwards from the actual order. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Michal Migurski wrote: Maybe someone (heh) could do a purpose-built fork of Potlatch designed especially for pulling in address info without displaying any other road data to eliminate confusion You probably don't even need to fork it. I suspect you could get most of the way there with a custom P2 style, a custom map_features.xml, and Andy's awesome new snapshot stuff (which is expressly designed for manually bringing in data from other sources). potlatch-dev is happy to help. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Address-improvement-through-imports-tp6953595p6963762.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: Anthony, my recollection is you're banned from editing our map, so don't worry about how we split or don't split the roads. I still edit the map. I am not banned. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Michal Migurski m...@stamen.com wrote: I'm not a fan of splitting ways Maybe we should remove the ability from the editors, then. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/03/2011 06:09 PM, Steven Johnson wrote: Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block, the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists. Point features can be automatically conflated into ranges (thus you can get simple rendering). Ranges can't properly spread out to form points. Many governments have very good parcel data, with addresses, as point or polygon features. That data is very accurate, and even updated as conditions change. --- I'm a fan of local mapping by real mappers. But I also know that the use case for map /users/ often starts with asking for directions. That requires address data that's near perfect. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 21:16 -0400, Mike N wrote: On 11/1/2011 7:14 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? I would agree - yes, yes, and yes if the data quality is good enough. TIGER is not of sufficient quality or precision to import - it is obfuscated to comply with privacy laws, but could be used by an external geocoder to get to the general vicinity. As long as we have all of the addresses, we could use satellite data to align them with houses. Is this the type of data we have in TIGER? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.908002lon=-78.91749zoom=18layers=M One example of what not to do :) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/2/11 1:49 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:02:13 -0400, Richard Welty wrote: i don't know about that, but i certainly think that the current default mapnik rendering for openstreetmap.org is showing us too much addressing detail. i'm not sure what showing the address interpolation ways here really adds to the mapnik rendering for the average visitor to OSM: I think it's nice to have, especially at the closest zoom, but I'm not entirely sure it's worth the visual clutter. i agree that it's nice to have, for us, the mappers, but i'm not persuaded it should be in the default view presented to random non-OSMers browsing the project. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 11/1/11 11:50 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Is there a way for mapnik to only render features of a certain class if there's not more than a certain density of them? i don't know about that, but i certainly think that the current default mapnik rendering for openstreetmap.org is showing us too much addressing detail. i'm not sure what showing the address interpolation ways here really adds to the mapnik rendering for the average visitor to OSM It lets them know the address interpolation ways are there in the data. Isn't the average visitor to OSM a mapper? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block, the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists. addr:inclusion=potential - The complete range of all possible address numbers on a block, although there may not physically be enough room on the block for that range of house numbers. Interpolation data from US TIGER is an example where Geo-location would only be as near as one block. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:interpolation ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block, the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists. This idea, of tagging address ranges within blocks, sounds like a good idea to me. Some cities, such as Louisville, KY, put address ranges on street signs, which would make gathering such information easy in those cities. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. That would require breaking a way at each junction, wouldn't it? Some models use that. The raw GeoBase data is in that form iirc. The current OSM address schema [1] allows less-accurate block-face addressing via interpolation. It also allows accurate address location of differently addressed entrances to the same building, routing to an address via footpaths, cycleways, etc. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block, the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists. Ranges are what 'all the others' use and are familiar territory for all navigation applications. They rarely if ever rely on address points and do interpolation, which works well in urban areas but can be miles off in rural areas. I think that ranges are good for a first iteration because they're less cumbersome to collect and map. They do require cutting up the ways at junctions like Richard mentions. Where there's no data available to import and / or not a lot of local mappers, ranges may be as good as it gets for OSM. Where there is good quality data to import and/or enough dedicated mappers, they should be replaced by address points, I think. Another thought: the ranges could be derived from the cross streets, couldn't they? At least here in Salt Lake the addresses on 900W between 100S and 200S are all in the 100-200 range. And if they can be derived, what use is it to duplicate the information? -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block, the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists. Ranges are what 'all the others' use and are familiar territory for all navigation applications. They rarely if ever rely on address points and do interpolation, which works well in urban areas but can be miles off in rural areas. I think that ranges are good for a first iteration because they're less cumbersome to collect and map. They do require cutting up the ways at junctions like Richard mentions. Where there's no data available to import and / or not a lot of local mappers, ranges may be as good as it gets for OSM. Where there is good quality data to import and/or enough dedicated mappers, they should be replaced by address points, I think. Another thought: the ranges could be derived from the cross streets, couldn't they? At least here in Salt Lake the addresses on 900W between 100S and 200S are all in the 100-200 range. And if they can be derived, what use is it to duplicate the information? Address range information can be derived from existing TIGER data quite simply. However, I would argue that we should only talk about importing point information for two reasons: 1) address ranges get in the way of editing existing TIGER features (to align a road you also have to align the two address range ways on either side) 2) address ranges are difficult to improve (if I wanted to map a single address after a photo map trip, I would have to split the existing address range way into constituent parts) ...whereas point addresses (even if we generate them artificially from TIGER address ranges) can easily be moved to their correct location without modifying complex way geometries. Their tags can be copied on to nearby buildings quickly and easily. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Address range information can be derived from existing TIGER data quite simply. I'm not sure how simple it is. It's simple in cases where TIGER data matches up very closely with OSM data. But that isn't universally true. And where it doesn't match up very closely, chances are high that the TIGER data is out of date or incorrect. Which brings me to the conclusion that there's no point in importing TIGER address information. A geocoder can simply try to find the address in OSM, and fall back to TIGER if the address isn't in OSM. Then, once the lat/lon is obtained (possibly from the external TIGER database), it can simply pass the lat/lon back into OSM for routing purposes (possibly along with a warning that TIGER data was used, which is quite likely to be be out of date and/or inaccurate. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Ian, On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: [..] Address range information can be derived from existing TIGER data quite simply. However, I would argue that we should only talk about importing point information for two reasons: 1) address ranges get in the way of editing existing TIGER features (to align a road you also have to align the two address range ways on either side) I agree that for *imports* we should only be looking at point data. Importing ranges means having to match external data to OSM ways which seems like a world of pain to me. Even if TIGER ids are permanent (are they?) TIGER tags could have been removed, ways merged or split.. Let alone merging ranges from other external data where you would have to match by name (ouch!) or geometry (also ouch!). For mapping, I'd say anything that people are willing to contribute is good. 2) address ranges are difficult to improve (if I wanted to map a single address after a photo map trip, I would have to split the existing address range way into constituent parts) ...whereas point addresses (even if we generate them artificially from TIGER address ranges) can easily be moved to their correct location without modifying complex way geometries. Their tags can be copied on to nearby buildings quickly and easily. Generating individual addresses from TIGER ranges means adding a layer of inaccuracy on top of a dataset that is already of sketchy quality to begin with, isn't it? -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Address range information can be derived from existing TIGER data quite simply. I'm not sure how simple it is. It's simple in cases where TIGER data matches up very closely with OSM data. But that isn't universally true. And where it doesn't match up very closely, chances are high that the TIGER data is out of date or incorrect. Which brings me to the conclusion that there's no point in importing TIGER address information. A geocoder can simply try to find the address in OSM, and fall back to TIGER if the address isn't in OSM. Then, once the lat/lon is obtained (possibly from the external TIGER database), it can simply pass the lat/lon back into OSM for routing purposes (possibly along with a warning that TIGER data was used, which is quite likely to be be out of date and/or inaccurate. I agree. I don't think we should import TIGER anything at this point. The previous e-mail was just pointing out that we don't need to derive address range data from anything because we have relatively accurate address data in TIGER -- at least more accurate than what we'd get from deriving from street intersections. But we shouldn't import TIGER addresses. We should be looking for county- or state-wide address points that we can convert to OSM format and merge into existing data nicely. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:38 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: This idea, of tagging address ranges within blocks, sounds like a good idea to me. Some cities, such as Louisville, KY, put address ranges on street signs, which would make gathering such information easy in those cities. Sounds good to me. Use addr:inclusion=potential. And put the info on separate ways which cover the actual address locations, not on the roads. If you're going to be surveying street signs by hand, it's really not that much extra work. (But hey, even if you insist on putting the address information on the streets themselves, you can still use addr:inclusion=potential, and it still won't cause any harm.) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Anthony, On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Address range information can be derived from existing TIGER data quite simply. I'm not sure how simple it is. It's simple in cases where TIGER data matches up very closely with OSM data. But that isn't universally true. And where it doesn't match up very closely, chances are high that the TIGER data is out of date or incorrect. Which brings me to the conclusion that there's no point in importing TIGER address information. A geocoder can simply try to find the address in OSM, and fall back to TIGER if the address isn't in OSM. Then, once the lat/lon is obtained (possibly from the external TIGER database), it can simply pass the lat/lon back into OSM for routing purposes (possibly along with a warning that TIGER data was used, which is quite likely to be be out of date and/or inaccurate. I'm all for not importing data where there's existing data people can use, but in the case of TIGER addresses you could actually make a point for importing: OSM could be a platform for improving that address data (like it should be for the GNIS points). 'All we need' is a suitable microtasking platform. -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Ian, On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: [..] Address range information can be derived from existing TIGER data quite simply. However, I would argue that we should only talk about importing point information for two reasons: 1) address ranges get in the way of editing existing TIGER features (to align a road you also have to align the two address range ways on either side) I agree that for *imports* we should only be looking at point data. Importing ranges means having to match external data to OSM ways which seems like a world of pain to me. Even if TIGER ids are permanent (are they?) TIGER tags could have been removed, ways merged or split.. Let alone merging ranges from other external data where you would have to match by name (ouch!) or geometry (also ouch!). I don't think we'd want to match address ranges with existing OSM data since it would probably take too much time to figure out and it'd probably be wrong most of the time anyway. But we shouldn't import ranges (especially from TIGER)... For mapping, I'd say anything that people are willing to contribute is good. ... but yes we should take address data however people are comfortable giving it to us if they take the time to survey it. 2) address ranges are difficult to improve (if I wanted to map a single address after a photo map trip, I would have to split the existing address range way into constituent parts) ...whereas point addresses (even if we generate them artificially from TIGER address ranges) can easily be moved to their correct location without modifying complex way geometries. Their tags can be copied on to nearby buildings quickly and easily. Generating individual addresses from TIGER ranges means adding a layer of inaccuracy on top of a dataset that is already of sketchy quality to begin with, isn't it? We're going to have to manually merge this stuff (including realigning address points based on Bing or other aerial imagery) no matter how we create it or where it's from, so as long as it's in the right vicinity it's still useful to us. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: I'm all for not importing data where there's existing data people can use, but in the case of TIGER addresses you could actually make a point for importing: OSM could be a platform for improving that address data (like it should be for the GNIS points). 'All we need' is a suitable microtasking platform. I can't speak for other locations, but here in Florida there is much better address information available from the counties than that available from TIGER. So if you're going to build a suitable microtasking platform for Florida, use the county data, not TIGER :). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: I'm all for not importing data where there's existing data people can use, but in the case of TIGER addresses you could actually make a point for importing: OSM could be a platform for improving that address data (like it should be for the GNIS points). 'All we need' is a suitable microtasking platform. I can't speak for other locations, but here in Florida there is much better address information available from the counties than that available from TIGER. So if you're going to build a suitable microtasking platform for Florida, use the county data, not TIGER :). That's the point of this thread: Martijn created a wiki page to collect data sources for addressing data: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_Improvement/United_States_Address_Data_Import_Sources If you have a chance, you should add information about the address data available in your area to that page. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Anthony On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: I'm all for not importing data where there's existing data people can use, but in the case of TIGER addresses you could actually make a point for importing: OSM could be a platform for improving that address data (like it should be for the GNIS points). 'All we need' is a suitable microtasking platform. I can't speak for other locations, but here in Florida there is much better address information available from the counties than that available from TIGER. So if you're going to build a suitable microtasking platform for Florida, use the county data, not TIGER :). Couldn't agree more - we have to make an effort to import the best address data available and that probably means looking at the local government level. That's why I made that page I started this thread with in the first place - to try and consolidate that effort. -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Which brings me to the conclusion that there's no point in importing TIGER address information. A geocoder can simply try to find the address in OSM, and fall back to TIGER if the address isn't in OSM. Then, once the lat/lon is obtained (possibly from the external TIGER database), it can simply pass the lat/lon back into OSM for routing purposes (possibly along with a warning that TIGER data was used, which is quite likely to be be out of date and/or inaccurate. I believe this is exactly what Nominatim currently does, minus the warning part. So address ranges are already a solved problem. All we're talking about here is importing *better* address data so that Nominatim doesn't have to fall back to TIGER. Toby ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Which brings me to the conclusion that there's no point in importing TIGER address information. A geocoder can simply try to find the address in OSM, and fall back to TIGER if the address isn't in OSM. Then, once the lat/lon is obtained (possibly from the external TIGER database), it can simply pass the lat/lon back into OSM for routing purposes (possibly along with a warning that TIGER data was used, which is quite likely to be be out of date and/or inaccurate. I believe this is exactly what Nominatim currently does, minus the warning part. So address ranges are already a solved problem. All we're talking about here is importing *better* address data so that Nominatim doesn't have to fall back to TIGER. Oh it does? Neat, I did not know that! -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Which brings me to the conclusion that there's no point in importing TIGER address information. A geocoder can simply try to find the address in OSM, and fall back to TIGER if the address isn't in OSM. Then, once the lat/lon is obtained (possibly from the external TIGER database), it can simply pass the lat/lon back into OSM for routing purposes (possibly along with a warning that TIGER data was used, which is quite likely to be be out of date and/or inaccurate. I believe this is exactly what Nominatim currently does, minus the warning part. So address ranges are already a solved problem. All we're talking about here is importing *better* address data so that Nominatim doesn't have to fall back to TIGER. Excellent. Looking back it seems like I might have been the one who brought up TIGER (although in a quotation, where it was used as an example). I checked out the page, and the source I know of for Florida is already listed. It's especially good for single family residences, but it is parcel-based data, so it is of limited use in locations where there is more than one address at a parcel (which, unfortunately, is the case for many of the business locations which people are likely to be looking for). It's more exact than TIGER, but I still think it should be imported manually if at all. And really you can use the same arguments against importing it as you can use for importing TIGER. Nominatim (et al) could just use the Florida county data as a separate database. There's only an advantage to integrating it into OSM as is unless you're going to manually verify it as you import it. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Folks, Do you realize: 1. We already have a method for address interpolation. It's called addr:interpolation There's no need for new tags. 2. Cutting ways into blocks would make for bedlam. There are better ways, but they require a bit more work. If this is something people want to take out of the talking phase, we can have a discussion on how to do the kind of per-block analysis w/o cutting the ways to pieces. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Serge, I think the topic of the thread is improving addresses through imports, not how we should tag addresses (not that you're derailing it, but I don't want to go too far afield). It seems like we have a general agreement that manually merging in pieces of address data converted to OSM format would be beneficial. Further, we would prefer to merge high quality address points (as opposed to address interpolation lines of any sort). Given that, I'm willing to take a county's-worth of address data, convert it to OSM, chunk it up and put it on a micro-tasking server where you could grab a piece, merge/import it, and others could verify your work. Would there be interest in working on this beyond me? On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: Folks, Do you realize: 1. We already have a method for address interpolation. It's called addr:interpolation There's no need for new tags. 2. Cutting ways into blocks would make for bedlam. There are better ways, but they require a bit more work. If this is something people want to take out of the talking phase, we can have a discussion on how to do the kind of per-block analysis w/o cutting the ways to pieces. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011 09:35:58 -0400, Steven Johnson wrote: Up to now, weve been talking largely about addresses as point features. However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets. What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block, the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists. Do we really want to go down the road of breaking up every way every block? It's bad enough trying to make changes to tags for long roads thanks to bridges and other breaks. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
I'd be interested in a way of auto-tagging blocks in a grid like most newer cities have. Set the zero point and intermediate points and it interpolates for you. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Hi, On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:14:03 -0600 Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, They are useful if you want OSM to be your quick fix to some itch you want to scratch. If you cannot be bothered to process the freely available hosue number datasets properly yourself but would rather abuse OSM as your free data processor where you dump in whatever you have and whoopsie, magically it becomes useful in MapQuest's Nominatim, then yeah, sure, go ahead, import until the shit comes out of everyone's ears - why learn from past mistakes. You probably think that OSM in the US is so broken, it cannot get worse no matter how much additional data sources you dump onto OSM. You know as well as I do that your local mappers to oversee it is a fig leaf! Importing more and more data will not make OSM strong. It might make OSM look useful in the short term but that's cheap usefulness - the same usefulness could be produced by just importing all your free sources into some other consolidated data set, something that is not unique to OSM, something that anyone can do at any time in their basement without the help of a crowd-sourced project. And for this cheap usefulness you are ruining the chances of there ever being a strong community - instead you'll have a few people acting as funnels for data dumped in from whatever sources. This is not the way to achieve a community that owns the map. And you know that and *still* you're happy to do it. OSM will never get anywhere in the States if people think like this. And that from someone who only just moved over! Bye Frederik ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011 23:12:09 +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote: Importing more and more data will not make OSM strong. It might make OSM look useful in the short term but that's cheap usefulness So you're saying that if I don't go out and spend thousands of dollars and countless hours driving every road in the State of Arkansas, I'm hurting the community by importing authoritative data? Even though those thousands of dollars and countless hours could be spent doing something more useful, something for which there is not an existing free and accurate data set, like points of interest, bike paths, parks, or individual buildings? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Hi Frederik, On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:14:03 -0600 Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, They are useful if you want OSM to be your quick fix to some itch you want to scratch. If you cannot be bothered to process the freely available hosue number datasets properly yourself but would rather abuse OSM as your free data processor where you dump in whatever you have and whoopsie, magically it becomes useful in MapQuest's Nominatim, then yeah, sure, go ahead, import until the shit comes out of everyone's ears - why learn from past mistakes. You probably think that OSM in the US is so broken, it cannot get worse no matter how much additional data sources you dump onto OSM. You know as well as I do that your local mappers to oversee it is a fig leaf! Importing more and more data will not make OSM strong. It might make OSM look useful in the short term but that's cheap usefulness - the same usefulness could be produced by just importing all your free sources into some other consolidated data set, something that is not unique to OSM, something that anyone can do at any time in their basement without the help of a crowd-sourced project. And for this cheap usefulness you are ruining the chances of there ever being a strong community - instead you'll have a few people acting as funnels for data dumped in from whatever sources. This is not the way to achieve a community that owns the map. And you know that and *still* you're happy to do it. OSM will never get anywhere in the States if people think like this. And that from someone who only just moved over! I will line up right behind you and the BAN IMPORTS bus for just about every kind of import other than this. I know what can go wrong with an import (as I've screwed up several of them). I've convinced many people to stop their importing ways. To a certain extent, I agree with you that in some cases blasting an area with data from external makes the map look done and discourages new mappers from adding new data. However, I disagree when it comes to addressing. Adding address data to OSM is extremely tedious. There's simply a whole lot of typing, clicking, mouse movement, etc. involved in adding addressing data to OSM, not to mention the time and money spent traveling to survey the data. The last US Census counted roughly 170 million addressable households. That's not something that can be crowdsourced in any reasonable amount of time. Sure, we could spend a couple years continuing to grow the community (as has been happening in metropolitan areas around the US), but even after we celebrate our 10,000th US-based active editor we'd still have to convince every single one of them to go survey 17,000 addresses. I think it's reasonable to take a small bite out of that huge task by using data that was previously crowdsourced (via taxpayer money) and ask as many members of the current OSM community in the US to manually add the data and verify it. I don't think that's an import in the sense of CanVec or TIGER or NHD or coastlines. I think that's a computer-assisted manual edit. The community is still involved. The community can still grow around this new (and perhaps easier) task. We could draw in new mappers by showing them a simple move your address marker to your house screen. It could be a part of mapping parties. -Ian ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Frederik, On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:14:03 -0600 Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, They are useful if you want OSM to be your quick fix to some itch you want to scratch. If you cannot be bothered to process the freely available hosue number datasets properly yourself but would rather abuse OSM as your free data processor where you dump in whatever you have and whoopsie, magically it becomes useful in MapQuest's Nominatim, then yeah, sure, go ahead, import until the shit comes out of everyone's ears - why learn from past mistakes. You probably think that OSM in the US is so broken, it cannot get worse no matter how much additional data sources you dump onto OSM. You know as well as I do that your local mappers to oversee it is a fig leaf! It's hardly a quick fix and you know that's not what we are setting out to achieve here. A quick fix would be for me to just take those shapefiles and dump them right into OSM. What we're doing instead here is considering if and how existing sources can be useful and how we can work together to get the best possible result from them. If the conclusion is that we should leave these data sources well alone, I'd love for that to be the outcome of a discussion among mappers with local knowledge, which is exactly what is happening here. Importing more and more data will not make OSM strong. It might make OSM look useful in the short term but that's cheap usefulness - the same usefulness could be produced by just importing all your free sources into some other consolidated data set, something that is not unique to OSM, something that anyone can do at any time in their basement without the help of a crowd-sourced project. And for this cheap usefulness you are ruining the chances of there ever being a strong community - instead you'll have a few people acting as funnels for data dumped in from whatever sources. This is not the way to achieve a community that owns the map. And you know that and *still* you're happy to do it. OSM will never get anywhere in the States if people think like this. And that from someone who only just moved over! I am very careful considering any import but also don't dismiss them offhand. Imports can be beneficial when the community can get their hands dirty and work with the data. This is what has been happening with TIGER - for all the mistakes that may have been made importing that data - and I can see that happening here. What I learn from the discussion in this thread is that there is a lot of willingness and creativity to engage with external address data in a way that would make the community own it. I think it could even go a step further: if we manage to create some microtasking platform - as we are discussing right now - we could engage more casual contributors - quite likely some of those 2/3 of OpenStreetMap account holders who signed up but never edited one node. If I can be part of that solution, yes please. -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/2/11 6:52 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: It's hardly a quick fix and you know that's not what we are setting out to achieve here. A quick fix would be for me to just take those shapefiles and dump them right into OSM. What we're doing instead here is considering if and how existing sources can be useful and how we can work together to get the best possible result from them. If the conclusion is that we should leave these data sources well alone, I'd love for that to be the outcome of a discussion among mappers with local knowledge, which is exactly what is happening here. for what it's worth, i think Martijn is on precisely the right path here. imports go wrong when they're done carelessly and without any quality control. it doesn't have to be that way. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/2/2011 6:59 PM, Richard Welty wrote: for what it's worth, i think Martijn is on precisely the right path here. imports go wrong when they're done carelessly and without any quality control. it doesn't have to be that way. I'm not against importing high quality address data, but can see Frederick's point: Nominatim could be made to search the US in order: OSM addresses - Public addressing data - TIGER addressing data. OSM would hold only the most current and accurate addresses. That makes updating the public and TIGER data sources drop dead simple, and could be done in 5 minutes. I have done a number of complete neighborhood address entries in the past and can confirm Ian's math - complete address survey is not a realistic goal. I now bother to create OSM addresses only for popular tourist destinations or where the roads have been reconfigured and a classic GPS sends you to the wrong location. Combining these manual entries with public sources would be a good fit to the OSM model. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: Folks, Do you realize: 1. We already have a method for address interpolation. It's called addr:interpolation There's no need for new tags. Yes. In fact, I mentioned it above along with a link (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:interpolation). addr:inclusion=potential can be used with addr:interpolation to indicate the that the range represents *potential* addresses, and not actual addresses. 2. Cutting ways into blocks would make for bedlam. Why? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/2/2011 9:46 PM, Anthony wrote: 2. Cutting ways into blocks would make for bedlam. Why? If there's no difference between the blocks except for addressing, it adds a needless extra step to map corrections. Instead of selecting an entire street with a single click to correct the name, change attributes etc, each block would need to be selected, one at a time while checking that the selection is correct by verifying that names within the selection all match. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: I think it's reasonable to take a small bite out of that huge task by using data that was previously crowdsourced (via taxpayer money) and ask as many members of the current OSM community in the US to manually add the data and verify it. I don't think that's an import in the sense of CanVec or TIGER or NHD or coastlines. I think that's a computer-assisted manual edit. I agree. Actually, I'd say it's not an import at all. I'm opposed to imports of address data. But I'm not at all opposed to computer-assisted manual edits. On the other hand, I don't think you're going to get very far with computer-assisted manual edits. As you said, even after we celebrate our 10,000th US-based active editor we'd still have to convince every single one of them to go survey 17,000 addresses. But hey, prove me wrong :). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: On 11/2/2011 9:46 PM, Anthony wrote: 2. Cutting ways into blocks would make for bedlam. Why? If there's no difference between the blocks except for addressing, it adds a needless extra step to map corrections. Instead of selecting an entire street with a single click to correct the name, change attributes etc, each block would need to be selected, one at a time while checking that the selection is correct by verifying that names within the selection all match. I guess, but there are already so many reasons to split ways that I think you're fighting a losing battle. A better solution would be to adopt something like street relations, so that the name of a road isn't duplicated on every single way in the first place. On the other hand, this does raise a problem in the opposite direction. If you put the potential address information on the way, what happens when you need to split the way? So, I guess I agree that putting the address information on the way is not a good solution, but for the opposite reason as the one given :). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/2/2011 9:59 PM, Anthony wrote: I guess, but there are already so many reasons to split ways that I think you're fighting a losing battle. A better solution would be to adopt something like street relations, so that the name of a road isn't duplicated on every single way in the first place. Splitting ways for maxSpeed, public transport, cycle lanes, route relations, and lane counts are all value-added mapper observations, but still often conveniently span a number of blocks. It would be interesting to know if very heavily mapped areas all trend toward more than 1 way between intersections. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
From: Mike N [mailto:nice...@att.net] Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports? Splitting ways for maxSpeed, public transport, cycle lanes, route relations, and lane counts are all value-added mapper observations, but still often conveniently span a number of blocks. It would be interesting to know if very heavily mapped areas all trend toward more than 1 way between intersections. From what I've seen, yes. There is just so much detail to add in an urban area. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: I guess, but there are already so many reasons to split ways that I think you're fighting a losing battle. A better solution would be to adopt something like street relations, so that the name of a road isn't duplicated on every single way in the first place. If anyone doubted that Anthony is just on this thread to troll, or to damage the map, this is pretty damn solid evidence. Anthony, my recollection is you're banned from editing our map, so don't worry about how we split or don't split the roads. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Nov 2, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: I'm all for not importing data where there's existing data people can use, but in the case of TIGER addresses you could actually make a point for importing: OSM could be a platform for improving that address data (like it should be for the GNIS points). 'All we need' is a suitable microtasking platform. I can't speak for other locations, but here in Florida there is much better address information available from the counties than that available from TIGER. So if you're going to build a suitable microtasking platform for Florida, use the county data, not TIGER :). Couldn't agree more - we have to make an effort to import the best address data available and that probably means looking at the local government level. That's why I made that page I started this thread with in the first place - to try and consolidate that effort. I like this approach. Ian and others in the thread have described address imports as a sort of computer-assisted manual editing, and I think for US addressing it's a great approach. The gulf between urban and rural parts of the U.S. is wide, and if we don't take advantage of the excellent local government data available for these purposes there are going to be regions of the country that *never* get mapped. I believe that we should develop an approach that is welcoming to local government representative who can help with the assisted importing, which may involve doing a few test imports in known places followed by the development of new tools or description of new procedures that newcomers to OSM who already steward local address databases can repeat for their own jurisdictions. First step would probably be a plan for shitty TIGER data - what should these local government folks do in cases where their local OSM coverage is pure TIGER 2007 drek? Just to name a local example, Mill Valley CA is right across the bay from SF and composed of mostly import junk. Maybe someone (heh) could do a purpose-built fork of Potlatch designed especially for pulling in address info without displaying any other road data to eliminate confusion, for use by owners of address info who know they have good, high-precision coverage. -mike. michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:14:03 -0600 Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, They are useful if you want OSM to be your quick fix to some itch you want to scratch. If you cannot be bothered to process the freely available hosue number datasets properly yourself but would rather abuse OSM as your free data processor where you dump in whatever you have and whoopsie, magically it becomes useful in MapQuest's Nominatim, then yeah, sure, go ahead, import until the shit comes out of everyone's ears - why learn from past mistakes. You probably think that OSM in the US is so broken, it cannot get worse no matter how much additional data sources you dump onto OSM. You know as well as I do that your local mappers to oversee it is a fig leaf! Importing more and more data will not make OSM strong. It might make OSM look useful in the short term but that's cheap usefulness - the same usefulness could be produced by just importing all your free sources into some other consolidated data set, something that is not unique to OSM, something that anyone can do at any time in their basement without the help of a crowd-sourced project. And for this cheap usefulness you are ruining the chances of there ever being a strong community - instead you'll have a few people acting as funnels for data dumped in from whatever sources. This is not the way to achieve a community that owns the map. And you know that and *still* you're happy to do it. OSM will never get anywhere in the States if people think like this. And that from someone who only just moved over! I know the population density argument isn't always recognized as being valid but I just ran some numbers that some might find interesting. Germany has a pretty active OSM community, right? Let's suppose that we could achieve a similar level of community in western Kansas. There are currently about 44,000 unique user IDs in the Germany extract from Geofabrik. Over 81,880,000 Germans, that makes for a mapper population of 0.054%. Population of western Kansas: 438,000 Assuming the same level of OSM participation of 0.054% that gives us 230 mappers to cover 1/3 the land mass of Germany. So, start with a blank map of Germany. Remember those 44,000 users? Now you only get 700. Report back when you have finished mapping all the addresses. I'll even let you skip the big cities. My point is about area, not volume of data. Remember, these are average mappers so 80% (80? 90? I know I've seen this statistic but don't recall it off the top of my head) of them will make one edit and never come back. This is the BEST case scenario for western Kansas and probably most of the interior of the country from Nevada to the Mississippi river, except for the urban pockets here and there. It is a 9 hour drive from Topeka to Denver and I think you go past a total of 3 cities with a population of over 10,000. In fact, out of the 54 counties west of Wichita, only 7 have a population for the whole county of over 10,000. So while we might be able to start OSM communities in some of the larger cities, vast stretches of the country would remain *completely* empty. How long do you want us to wait? 5 years? 10 years? Now I guess you could say that where there are few people, there is no need for maps. But isn't our goal to map the entire planet? If OSM wants to be taken seriously as a global dataset, I don't think that argument is valid. All that to say that what has already been said by others. While I am not a big fan of imports, I see address data as: 1) important for the general usefulness of our data 2) one of the easier things that can be imported with a low likelihood of things going horribly wrong 3) freely available with acceptable accuracy from our local governments. And the accuracy part is important. Notice how no one wants to touch TIGER address data even though that would be the easiest solution for a nationwide data set if we were just rabidly importing things. So I would say we HAVE learned from past mistakes. (Not saying that the TIGER import was a *complete* mistake, mind you... but it obviously does have a lot of problems) Toby ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
All, We have seen a few local address point imports in the US. I know of DC and San Diego, there may be more. That made me want to look into other possible import sources for addresses. I collected some findings on the wiki here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_Improvement/United_States_Address_Data_Import_Sources Feel free to add your (local) knowledge there. But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
By the way, if that page looks empty, that's because I just did not find very many resources on the state level which is where I looked. But at least I put in a link to what appears to be the central clearinghouse / catalog for geospatial data for each state. Martijn On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: All, We have seen a few local address point imports in the US. I know of DC and San Diego, there may be more. That made me want to look into other possible import sources for addresses. I collected some findings on the wiki here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_Improvement/United_States_Address_Data_Import_Sources Feel free to add your (local) knowledge there. But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:16:11 -0600, Martijn van Exel wrote: By the way, if that page looks empty, that's because I just did not find very many resources on the state level which is where I looked. But at least I put in a link to what appears to be the central clearinghouse / catalog for geospatial data for each state. FWIW, the Arkansas address points are supposed to correspond to a specific structure (and sometimes even specific units). However, since each county collects the data on its own, accuracy varies somewhat, although it's generally very good. I haven't heard any objections over my previous import of three counties, so I'll import more if I ever get some free time. It would help if upload.py wasn't so finicky at times. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
I noticed the Arkansas import[1] in Bentonville as I was driving through. When I went back and added a few things along the way it seemed to be of pretty good quality although I didn't look at it too closely. As wary as I am of imports, I do think addresses are one of the things that CAN actually be imported successfully as long as the source data is of high enough quality. Since it is just nodes, there is much less of a technical hurdle to importing them, unlike NHD or building outlines where imports can fail in the middle and leave junk on the map. It is also data that is time consuming and, for a lot of people, boring to collect and enter. If you're mapping a shop or restaurant that you are visiting it's one thing to add in a couple of addr:* tags but to get truly good coverage including residential areas is much, much harder. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Arkansas_Situs_Address_Points_Import Toby On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: By the way, if that page looks empty, that's because I just did not find very many resources on the state level which is where I looked. But at least I put in a link to what appears to be the central clearinghouse / catalog for geospatial data for each state. Martijn On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: All, We have seen a few local address point imports in the US. I know of DC and San Diego, there may be more. That made me want to look into other possible import sources for addresses. I collected some findings on the wiki here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_Improvement/United_States_Address_Data_Import_Sources Feel free to add your (local) knowledge there. But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? Best, -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On 11/1/2011 7:14 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: But let's discuss: are address imports useful (I say yes, for geocoding and routing they're indispensable), necessary (I say yes, potential OSM data users will want to be able to do these things) and feasible (I say yes, if there's local mappers to oversee it)? I would agree - yes, yes, and yes if the data quality is good enough. TIGER is not of sufficient quality or precision to import - it is obfuscated to comply with privacy laws, but could be used by an external geocoder to get to the general vicinity. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 19:40:27 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: It is also data that is time consuming and, for a lot of people, boring to collect and enter. If you're mapping a shop or restaurant that you are visiting it's one thing to add in a couple of addr:* tags but to get truly good coverage including residential areas is much, much harder. Capturing individual points is rather tedious, but I've had pretty good luck getting myself to write down start/end addresses for each side of a street I'm driving and do interpolation. With a better camera solution, it wouldn't be too hard to do points, but I haven't come up with something that's easy, has good resolution, and has good automatic exposure. And small. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
Another thing that impedes progress for address mapping is the fact that the house numbers appear on the map so indiscriminately. In rural areas or other places where address points are far apart, that's helpful, but I think this map is way too cluttered: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.56303lon=-117.06017zoom=17layers=M . I know, I know, don't map for the renderer, so don't not map for the renderer either, but the renderer can be improved too. Is there a way for mapnik to only render features of a certain class if there's not more than a certain density of them? On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote: On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 19:40:27 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: It is also data that is time consuming and, for a lot of people, boring to collect and enter. If you're mapping a shop or restaurant that you are visiting it's one thing to add in a couple of addr:* tags but to get truly good coverage including residential areas is much, much harder. Capturing individual points is rather tedious, but I've had pretty good luck getting myself to write down start/end addresses for each side of a street I'm driving and do interpolation. With a better camera solution, it wouldn't be too hard to do points, but I haven't come up with something that's easy, has good resolution, and has good automatic exposure. And small. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:02:13 -0400, Richard Welty wrote: i don't know about that, but i certainly think that the current default mapnik rendering for openstreetmap.org is showing us too much addressing detail. i'm not sure what showing the address interpolation ways here really adds to the mapnik rendering for the average visitor to OSM: I think it's nice to have, especially at the closest zoom, but I'm not entirely sure it's worth the visual clutter. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
