[Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
Hi, I wonder if there is somebody interested in tagging large areas. I started tagging some highlands, because there is nothing compareable to this. Tagging highlands might be not so much about ground survey, because there are usually no borders with a label, but they seem to be obviously necessary. Do you have any suggestions for the tagging? Refenreces http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/cracklinrain/diary/20178 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Cracklinrain/highlands Regards cracklinrain ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Tobias cra_klinr...@gmx.de Do you have any suggestions for the tagging? this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Basically our data model is not very suited to tag large areas, and these topographic areas tend to not have sharp borders, so they would IMHO request a new datatype. I might be a better idea to start a parallel project (e.g. with shapefiles in a more adequate scale), e.g. starting with natural earths physical dataset and adding translations and refinements. This dataset could be crowdsourced and distributed in a license compatible with osm in order to make them mixable. For tagging within osm the logical namespace would be under the natural key IMHO. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com 2013/10/9 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. there is also the proposal for mountain_range, ridge, ... cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. there is also the proposal for mountain_range, ridge, ... Thank you for both hints so far. Cheers cracklinrain ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com wrote: Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. Bad idea. Replace region by boundary or multipolygon and you get it. Not really a good proposal trying to reinvent the wheel with different words. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). I read the last discussion about natural/mapping large areas a little bit. Actually my preparation was mainly based on the missing content at the wiki. Seems to be as if I could start a some documentation of the discussions at the lists and other ideas. Basically our data model is not very suited to tag large areas, and these topographic areas tend to not have sharp borders, so they would IMHO request a new datatype. A datatype for blurry large areas or just for blurry areas? Borders are also multipolygons and of the same size. So the size itself is not the problem - or is it indeed? I might be a better idea to start a parallel project (e.g. with shapefiles in a more adequate scale), e.g. starting with natural earths physical dataset and adding translations and refinements. This dataset could be crowdsourced and distributed in a license compatible with osm in order to make them mixable. A parallel project, let's name it OpenGeoMap, would neccessarily require to merge the projects in a way that does not bother anybody. Regarding other natural tags like natural=desert etc and borders such a project would be a great idea. Regarding other data types it is not a benefit I would say, because keeping the data seperated would deny to relate them to each other. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Tobias cra_klinr...@gmx.de It might be a better idea to start a parallel project (e.g. with shapefiles in a more adequate scale), e.g. starting with natural earths physical dataset and adding translations and refinements. This dataset could be crowdsourced and distributed in a license compatible with osm in order to make them mixable. A parallel project, let's name it OpenGeoMap, would neccessarily require to merge the projects in a way that does not bother anybody. in my understanding you would not have to merge them, you could use them in parallel (say as an overlay, or an additional layer in rendering phase). In the end, OSM is very detailed, much more detailed than these topographical regions, take the black forest from your example: it is usually divided into the southern, middle and the northern black forest, but according to newer classification divided into far more sub-entities as can be seen here: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturr%C3%A4umliche_Gliederung_des_Schwarzwaldes. Still, all these subregions cannot be drawn in a spatial definition comparable to the osm data, they are rather blurry. From looking at this table in wikipedia it seems to depend on the geological characteristics where they put them, i.e. this won't be surveyable by laymen and probably other than specialist knowledge you'll also need specialist equipment to survey (because we are talking about underground properties). As a solution we'd copy from the experts ;-) It depends what you wanted to do with this data, if you want to draw a nicely curved text Schwarzwald on a zoom 9 tile you will not need very detailed data, if you want to decide whether a given house is still in the Schwarzwald or already in the rhine valley you'll probably find out that also a very detailed map still might leave this up to its individual definition of both (if its on the border the answer might depend on who you ask, and an answer like on the border of both might be more reasonable than deciding for one). Well, you could use a rendered osm background (i.e. a slippy map) and draw above, say in QGis or similar, some rough polygons and refine these initial polygons iteratively when you notice that there are problems, but where would you get the information from? In the end it seems more promising to collect and reassemble the findings of experts (e.g. these maps published in Wikipedia and based on the Bundesanstalt für Landeskunde) and distribute them (if legally possible) as a unified dataset with translations (i.e. you will have to create a consistent hierarchy, name and translation columns as attributes for the geometry). You will have the spatial reference so you could at any time merge this dataset with OSM if you needed to. Regarding other natural tags like natural=desert etc and borders such a project would be a great idea. also these other tags like desert are not yet in general usage, and they suffer from similar problems (blurry borders, unclear definitions, not easily surveyable). Regarding other data types it is not a benefit I would say, because keeping the data seperated would deny to relate them to each other. see above, they will always relate to each other because of the geocoding, and they would never fit 100% because of the different scales involved by their nature (how they are defined / get surveyed). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
btw.: here you can find maps with the natural regions (apparently complete) of Germany in 1:200.000. There is a copyright hint: © ehemaliges Institut für Landeskunde, mit freundlicher Genehmigung des Bundesinstituts für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschunghttp://www.bbsr.bund.de/cln_016/sid_226F01ABD534381195FDEBFD0ECF614F/BBSR/DE/Home/homepage__node.html?__nnn=trueim BBR Stab Wissenschaftliche Dienste), maybe you can ask the BBR / BBSR how they feel about releasing these as open data (if not done already). http://geographie.giersbeck.de/karten/ cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
Am 09.10.2013 16:32, schrieb Pieren: On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com wrote: Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. Bad idea. Replace region by boundary or multipolygon and you get it. Not really a good proposal trying to reinvent the wheel with different words. Just for clarification: I suggested the wiki page as a starting point to look into past discussions around this topic. I fully agree that this proposal is abandoned for good reason. Regarding the idea itself I agree with Martin: I do not think something large scale and fuzzy like the Black Forest should be mapped in the database at all. If you think about this a bit longer it would totally be reasonable to create a giant multipolygon for an ocean or a continent - to me that's no good idea. Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding the idea itself I agree with Martin: I do not think something large scale and fuzzy like the Black Forest should be mapped in the database at all. If you think about this a bit longer it would totally be reasonable to create a giant multipolygon for an ocean or a continent - to me that's no good idea. I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607 Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
Am 09.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Pieren: I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607 In fact that's a pretty good example for me: I think the line is at least off by a few kilometers near the western part of the German-Austrian border ;-) I noticed that there are also entries for the continents but just single nodes. That's probably a more pragmatic approach to make things searchable in Nominatim. Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Pieren pier...@gmail.com I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607 yes, I am aware of that, but decided to ignore them. My guess is that they will soon be broken and repeatedly be broken until at some point it will be decided to delete them, similar to the italian landmass ;-) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
