Paul Norman wrote:
If you assume wall=no buildings attached to buildings without a wall
tag can be combined, I would estimate that the number of ways is at
least 1.5x what it needs to be.
-1, I'd suggest building=roof for those that are roofs. IMHO it is nice
to distinguish them. Why do you
2012/9/30 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
The problem *I* am seeing with the cadastre data I have looked at is that a
building is not simply one or two profiles, but several seemingly unrelated
elements all strange shapes and not relating to the imagery. Since there is
no explanation of the
Am 30.09.2012 um 03:28 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com:
The distribution of building sizes indicates otherwise. The most common
building size in the cadastre imports is a mere 6 square meters (65 square
feet).
Sorry, of course you are right, I guess I was confused last night ;-)
2012/9/30 Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr:
We provided explanations many times...
Separate polygons can come from:
- different ownership of building parts
...
It is not data errors, but much more detailed geometry compared to
what you can do by simply surveying or trace on aerials.
From: Vladimir Vyskocil [mailto:vladimir.vysko...@gmail.com]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] All you've ever wanted to know about the french
cadastre
The larger part of cadastre data
is just dumped into the data base never to be touched again by any
mapper.
That's also wrong, the french
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
We provided explanations many times...
Separate polygons can come from:
- different ownership of building parts
...
It is not data errors, but much more detailed geometry compared to
what you can do by simply surveying or trace on aerials.
IMHO it is a data error
On Sep 30, 2012, at 3:41 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
Of these 17.9
million are version=1. 62.2% of cadastre building ways are never touched
again by any mapper.
So what? That still doesn't tell you anything. We've already heard
descriptions of the process including edits and
On Sep 30, 2012, at 3:10 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I know we do not at all tag
owners of objects in OSM.
By we, do you mean your local community or all OSM users? If all users, then
as far as I know, we tag anything we find useful in OSM.
Oh, see also:
From: Toby Murray [mailto:toby.mur...@gmail.com]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Réf.: Re: All you've ever wanted to know about the
french cadastre
I think the biggest cost for long tags that are heavily used is really
in the planet file size. A bigger planet takes longer to generate, longer
to
Am 30.09.2012 um 02:04 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com:
in a city where the buildings are joined). A complete
analysis is beyond the scope of this email, but we can get an idea from [2]
and the fact that the most common unsimplified building area in the import
is 6 square meters[3].
From: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 5:21 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] All you've ever wanted to know about the french
cadastre
Am 30.09.2012 um 02:04 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com:
in a city where the buildings are joined
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:21:38PM +0100, THEVENON Julien wrote:
De : Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de
I don't know which data you have been looking at, but let's ask
Nominatim, shall we?
Ok, so by example could you extract stats from Grenoble instead of whole
France ? I thinks this quite
Le ven. 28 sept. 2012 08:00 HAEC, Paul Norman a écrit :
sorry this detailled here in section les differents calques
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Cadastre_Français/Aspects_techni
ques_du_cadastre_en_ligne
and here qu est ce qui est reutilisable
The larger part of cadastre data
is just dumped into the data base never to be touched again by any mapper.
That's also wrong, the french community has developed some very powerful tools
like osmose.openstreetmap.fr which is used to automatically discover many
errors from cadastre and
While I would agree that the French data is huge, it _is_ pleasing to be
able to make maps where the density of building is observable, even if you
know nothing about the buildings. I'm not sure that every building in every
village is quite required, but it'll probably go that way eventually.
Is
Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
I don't agree the cadastre is ugly once rendered ! A rendered map like this
for example, is in my opinion something more pleasant than a map with only a
house once and there with large holes :
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.70272lon=7.26654zoom=15layers=Q
This
There are some excellent examples of how mapping should be done all over the
world. But I do hope we have shown that a large percentage of the data STILL
needs a lot of work? At the end of the day this is more about education of
mappers and how to get the best out of the material
Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
There are some excellent examples of how mapping should be done all over the
world. But I do hope we have shown that a large percentage of the data STILL
needs a lot of work? At the end of the day this is more about education of
mappers and how to get the best out of
Le 28/09/2012 10:00, Lester Caine a écrit :
There are some excellent examples of how mapping should be done all
over the world. But I do hope we have shown that a large percentage of
the data STILL needs a lot of work? At the end of the day this is more
about education of mappers and how to
Le 27/09/2012 02:22, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
2012/9/26 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
To Frederik,
In your example, I agree with you that the diagonal line is a glitch,
most probably coming from a parcel line just underneath.
actually it is not only the diagonal line (which is an obvious
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
Conclusion:
A significant number of cadastre imported buildings consist of multiple
ways, such as in the example Frederik gave. The difference from other
buildings a week old is statistically significant. This is true even
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Personally I would prefer to see
http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/funnybuilding.png as a single closed
outline box.
I think that 6-7 buildings (looking at the bing aerial
From: Pieren [mailto:pier...@gmail.com]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] All you've ever wanted to know about the french
cadastre
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
Conclusion:
A significant number of cadastre imported buildings consist of
multiple ways
2012/9/27 Vincent Pottier vpott...@gmail.com:
Le 27/09/2012 02:22, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
actually it is not only the diagonal line (which is an obvious error),
but it is also all or most of the divisions, which don't seem to
corrispond at all to real buildings or parts of them (maybe
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
buildings should follow reality (which they apparently don't do at all
in the cadastre version).
How can you say that from an aerial imagery ? It is also possible that
the cadastre is outdated. Like any source
2012/9/27 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
buildings should follow reality (which they apparently don't do at all
in the cadastre version).
How can you say that from an aerial imagery ? It is also possible that
the
Pieren wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
buildings should follow reality (which they apparently don't do at all
in the cadastre version).
How can you say that from an aerial imagery ? It is also possible that
the cadastre is outdated.
On 27 sept. 2012, at 14:04, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Now that I have scanned some of the French material I must say that it is of
very low quality and all of the stuff I have reviewed needs at least SOME
work to bring it up to a better standard. At best all one can say
Hi,
I think we should perhaps add a new section in the cadastre documentation:
the purpose of the cadastre, and the way it is made.
In France you need to ask for a permission from the public authority (the
municipalities) before to make a new building. It include a detailed map of
what you want
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Many of the buildings moving away from the one identified simply do not even
fit the footprint on the bing imagery and many of the 'divisions' seem to
follow the ridge of a building rather than a difference between roof
De : Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
Many of the buildings moving away from the one identified simply do not
even fit the footprint on the bing imagery ?
What make you so sure that the thruth is in imagery and not in cadastre ?
particulary considering that Bing is often several year late
Am 27.09.2012 14:25, schrieb Vladimir Vyskocil:
On 27 sept. 2012, at 14:04, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Now that I have scanned some of the French material I must say that it is of
very low quality and all of the stuff I have reviewed needs at least SOME
work to bring it up to a
On Sep 27, 2012, at 2:18 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
This is not an example that you only find after a long search; it is a
typical cadastre import building.
Until you can back up your claim with solid numbers, your claim, more
specifically the wordtypical, is just FUD.
Furthermore it can hurt
De : Simon Poole si...@poole.ch
Supposedly the cadastre includes street names and house numbers, however
of the 27 million buildings (plus 6 million wall=no) only a minuscule
number have further information attached, matter of fact there are more
nodes with addresses tagged in France than
THEVENON Julien wrote:
* *Many of the buildings moving away from the one identified simply do not
even fit the footprint on the bing imagery ?
What make you so sure that the thruth is in imagery and not in cadastre ?
particulary considering that Bing is often several year late and that offical
On 27/09/2012 12:01, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Interesting, I have never heard before of building=yes with wall=no
I just had lunch in an Italian restaurant, which I promptly tagged while
waiting for my dessert... It happened to be located in a
cadastre-imported building in two parts - one
Am 27.09.2012 15:03, schrieb THEVENON Julien:
* De :* Simon Poole si...@poole.ch
* *Supposedly the cadastre includes street names and house
numbers, however
* *of the 27 million buildings (plus 6 million wall=no) only a
minuscule
* *number have further information attached, matter of fact
At least in my country, address is tied to lot parcels and not to
individual buildings.
And since we dont have parcel data, we add housenumber as nodes.
Maning Sambale (mobile)
On Sep 27, 2012 9:32 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:
Am 27.09.2012 15:03, schrieb THEVENON Julien:
* De :*
On 27/09/2012 15:29, Simon Poole wrote:
Just so there is no misunderstanding: even taking address tagged nodes
in to account, the addresses / houses ratio is lower and at best not
different than in other countries without countrywide access to
cadastre-like sources. 3% with nodes, 0.6%
2012/9/27 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch:
Just so there is no misunderstanding: even taking address tagged nodes in to
account, the addresses / houses ratio is lower and at best not different
than in other countries without countrywide access to cadastre-like
sources. 3% with nodes, 0.6% without,
De :Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
Because the cadastre work is an armchair mapping process whereas the
address tagging requires local survey. They are often done by two
different type of contributors.
On top of that as the cadastre distinguish light buildings and buildings, house
Joakim Fors wrote:
Not having access to the cadastre layer I can't comment on the differences
between what has been traced and the source data, but I can SEE a distinct
positional difference between the bing layer and the OSM buildings. If there
was a general offset, then I would accept that
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
So the question remains why the information in not being added to the outlines.
Because the cadastre work is an armchair mapping process whereas the address
tagging requires local survey. They are often done by two different type of
contributors.
Armchair mapping via
On 27/09/2012 16:07, Lester Caine wrote:
France would benefit from a few 'cadastre' importers filling other
details in the areas they are importing :(
In that you agree with most of the opinions expressed on the French list
: contributors using the cadastre generally add other details at the
2012/9/27 THEVENON Julien julien_theve...@yahoo.fr:
De : Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
Because the cadastre work is an armchair mapping process whereas the
address tagging requires local survey. They are often done by two
different
type of contributors.
On top of that as the cadastre
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
In that you agree with most of the opinions expressed on the French
list : contributors using the cadastre generally add other details at
the same time, which is one of the reasons why they find using two
different accounts inconvenient.
Maybe it's a work in
De : SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
Maybe it's a work in progress:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.99103lon=0.33956zoom=15layers=M
Or there are some people that think this is a good way to highlight where some
roads are missing.
Personnaly I prefer to draw roads and building at
De : Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
+1, usually (at least in some cities I checked) housenumbers are
identifying a whole parcel (exceptions exist), IMHO better then
assigning them to a single house as Simon suggested it would be to add
them to the whole parcel (I guess you have
On 27/09/2012 16:28, SomeoneElse wrote:
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
In that you agree with most of the opinions expressed on the French
list : contributors using the cadastre generally add other details at
the same time, which is one of the reasons why they find using two
different accounts
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Without the isolated clusters of buildings, how would you know that
some important roads are missing ?
Visiting the village and walking around it?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On 27/09/2012 16:45, SomeoneElse wrote:
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Without the isolated clusters of buildings, how would you know that
some important
roads are missing ?
Visiting the village and walking around it?
Are we now reaching the crux of this discussion ? Do you believe that
local
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:45 PM, SomeoneElse
li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
Visiting the village and walking around it?
This village is named Condom. That's probably why you remember it
and forward this example from time to time. Would you come if we
organize a mapping party at Condom ? (I
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
France would benefit from a few 'cadastre' importers filling other details in
the areas they are importing :(
In that you agree with most of the opinions expressed on the French list :
contributors using the cadastre generally add other details at the same time,
which
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
In that you agree with most of the opinions expressed on the French list :
contributors using the cadastre generally add other details at the same time,
which is one of the reasons why they find using two different accounts
inconvenient.
Maybe
Pieren wrote:
Visiting the village and walking around it?
This village is named Condom. That's probably why you remember it
and forward this example from time to time. Would you come if we
organize a mapping party at Condom ? (I said mapping party). But
hey, the village is mapped. We just miss
2012/9/27 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
If I was involved in managing this, then to be honest I'd be considering
wiping it again.
Then I am glad you are not involved in it, because it would be a serious
case of vandalism. This would be totally unjustified to wipe such a valid
geographic
De : Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
Looking at the imagery or some other source if you are an arm chair mapper,
or
driving around with the GPS tracker if you want a run in the country.
THEN adding buildings using the other sources. Even just looking at what is
available on potlatch for
De : Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
The 'two accounts' is a bit of red herring here -
in my opinion - but similarly JUST uploading buildings is pointless?
Not at all. This is the heart of the problem for a lot of french contributors
!!!
as already mentionned raw building import is the
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Are we now reaching the crux of this discussion ? Do you believe that
local survey is a requirement for mapping ? I don't and I back my
position with all the places I have mapped without having visited them
- I'm curious about what criticism you'll express about the
Le 27/09/2012 16:28, SomeoneElse a écrit :
Maybe it's a work in progress:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.99103lon=0.33956zoom=15layers=M
Cheers,
Andy
OSM is a work in progress.
--
FrViPofm
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Without the isolated clusters of buildings, how would you know that some
important
roads are missing ?
Visiting the village and walking around it?
Are we now reaching the crux of this discussion ? Do you believe that local
survey is a
SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
Actually, I think that on-the-ground mapping and the use of aerial
imagery / cadastre data are complementary. There are many things that
you'd miss if you used one exclusively at the expense of the other.
Yes - and local surveyors being the
2012/9/27 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
+1, usually (at least in some cities I checked) housenumbers are
identifying a whole parcel (exceptions exist), IMHO better then
assigning them to a single house as Simon suggested it would be to add
them to the whole parcel (I guess you
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 04:59:27PM +0100, THEVENON Julien wrote:
For major part of French contributors we are adding buildings and other
details not related to cadastre, so having one account per kind of edit will
be really painfull.. but it it will not be for people that just perform raw
sh == Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de writes:
sh Objects are real word objects here: highways, pois, boundaries etc.
sh In other words, for 7 imported buildings you manage to map one
sh non-cadastre object. So indeed, I would agree that French
sh contributors do map other details.
sh
Le 27/09/2012 09:49, Lester Caine a écrit :
Claims are being made that the French data is more up to date, but if
it is not being properly geo-referenced and is producing poor quality
data should it be allowed in? returning to the example, in the absence
of evidence that the building IS split
De : Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de
Hi Sarah,
Sorry for this late response and hope to make debate less passionate.
I don't know which data you have been looking at, but let's ask
Nominatim, shall we?
Great idea, this is always good to discuss about facts
Ok, so by example could you
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de wrote:
for 7 imported buildings you manage to map one non-cadastre object.
As Eric said, I find the ratio quite good. I would be interested by
the ratio buldings/non buildings in Germany (your email is German). As
I understood, it
Vincent Pottier wrote:
Claims are being made that the French data is more up to date, but if it is
not being properly geo-referenced and is producing poor quality data should it
be allowed in? returning to the example, in the absence of evidence that the
building IS split into multiple units it
From: Christian Quest [mailto:cqu...@openstreetmap.fr]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] All you've ever wanted to know about the french
cadastre
2012/9/27 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch:
Just so there is no misunderstanding: even taking address tagged nodes
in to account, the addresses / houses ratio
2012/9/26 THEVENON Julien julien_theve...@yahoo.fr:
De : Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
Sees the light :)
Great !
SO while we have this type of raster data from as a background in
potlatch and josm and some elements of it in vector files from OS and
other
sources. You are having to
On Sep 26, 2012, at 6:25 PM, Christian Quest wrote:
The OSM data is extracted from PDF vector data.
To be exhaustive, I have to mention that this is true only for cities that have
a vector cadaster.
Some cities (10% as an order of magnitude) have only a raster cadaster, in
which case the
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Olivier Croquette m...@ocroquette.de wrote:
If no, it doesn't make any sense to me that a vector based process for the
cadaster is an import, and a raster based is not. Everything is the same :
kind of data, license, provider…
There seems to be a
On Sep 26, 2012, at 7:44 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
I think that drawing all of the nodes and points manually is an
important difference, from a quality point of view. Each node or way
that you draw by hand, is carefully considered and placed, one at a
time. It isn't perfect; nothing is. I
Hi,
On 26.09.2012 19:44, Richard Weait wrote:
I think that drawing all of the nodes and points manually is an
important difference, from a quality point of view. Each node or way
that you draw by hand, is carefully considered and placed, one at a
time. It isn't perfect; nothing is. I suggest
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I think that drawing all of the nodes and points manually is an
important difference, from a quality point of view. Each node or way
that you draw by hand, is carefully considered and placed, one at a
time. It isn't perfect; nothing is. I suggest that this leads to a
kind
De : Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org
To give an example, look at this imported building
http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/funnybuilding.png
Note how the main building consists of 8 separate parts plus a strange
diagonal line, and note how the smallest parts are just about 2 metres
wide.
On Sep 26, 2012, at 8:13 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
On 26.09.2012 19:44, Richard Weait wrote:
I think that drawing all of the nodes and points manually is an
important difference, from a quality point of view. Each node or way
that you draw by hand, is carefully considered and placed, one at a
De : Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
Now that I understand what is going on, I can see where some off the
'extra' lines come from, and the diagonal is probably due to a boundary
detail from changing sheets.
This is more often due to split of landuse ownership. There is no differences
THEVENON Julien wrote:
* De :* Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
* *Now that I understand what is going on, I can see where some off the
'extra' lines come from, and the diagonal is probably due to a boundary detail
from changing sheets.
This is more often due to split of landuse ownership. There
To Richard,
I've seen examples where manually tracing over raster images has been
done roughly and quickly. It's not a guarantee of quality. You are
saying that it's time consuming to check data from external source and
probably more accurate to trace manually over raster images. But it is
also
Hi,
Le 26/09/2012 19:44, Richard Weait a écrit :
I think that drawing all of the nodes and points manually is an
important difference, from a quality point of view. Each node or way
that you draw by hand, is carefully considered and placed, one at a
time. It isn't perfect; nothing is. I
In France, cadastre is the most official source about buildings and
land ownership. When you buy/sell a building all the documents refers
to the cadastre.
It provides sometime too many details compared to what could be seen
by survey. Does this mean it is wrong to have too many details ?
Richard Weait wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Olivier Croquette m...@ocroquette.de
wrote:
If no, it doesn't make any sense to me that a vector based process for the
cadaster is an import, and a raster based is not. Everything is the same :
kind of data, license, provider…
Christian Quest wrote:
So cross check with Bing
must be done afterwards, exactly like when using vector data.
That's why I consider manual tracing as a waste of time, and not high
quality compared to using extracted building from vector data.
Christian
I've now seen your source data, and that
Le 26/09/2012 23:00, Christian Quest a écrit :
In France, cadastre is the most official source about buildings and
land ownership. When you buy/sell a building all the documents refers
to the cadastre.
It provides sometime too many details compared to what could be seen
by survey. Does this
2012/9/26 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
Christian Quest wrote:
So cross check with Bing
must be done afterwards, exactly like when using vector data.
That's why I consider manual tracing as a waste of time, and not high
quality compared to using extracted building from vector data.
Le 27/09/2012 00:35, Christian Quest a écrit :
I agree that a tool in JOSM (or whatever is your editor of choice) to
split a polygon into 2 smaller polygons could be really helpful, not
only for buildings.
In JOSM ?
I add 2 nodes (with the middle cross in the segments)
I select them and the
2012/9/26 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
Personally I would prefer to see
http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/funnybuilding.png as a single closed
outline box.
I think that 6-7 buildings (looking at the bing aerial
From: Olivier Croquette [mailto:m...@ocroquette.de]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] All you've ever wanted to know about the french
cadastre
This is not an example that you only find after a long search; it is a
typical cadastre import building
2012/9/26 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
To Frederik,
In your example, I agree with you that the diagonal line is a glitch,
most probably coming from a parcel line just underneath.
actually it is not only the diagonal line (which is an obvious error),
but it is also all or most of the divisions,
Hi,
Le 27/09/2012 02:18, Paul Norman a écrit :
Now, the analysis of geometry.
One measure of how broken down into parts buildings are is to take the
buildings, turn them into polygons, combine them into one multipolygon with
ST_Union and then count the number of parts with ST_Dump and
92 matches
Mail list logo
