I think in the US the tiger import used such tags with the aim to remove them
once the item has been checked. A massive and still ongoing effort from what I
heard.
On 20 July 2020 10:17:25 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 12:33, David Wales
>wrote:
>
>> Is there any
Hi,
Have you discovered
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap_for_Government ?
It collects projects where governments seek closer integration with OSM.
One in particular comes to mind: "An Open Summer of Code (osoc) project to
building a tool to compare and maintain OSM cycle routes
Thanks, I'll check it out.
Greg Dutkowski
+61 0362238495/0408238495
1 Cascade Road, SOUTH HOBART.
On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 12:48, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
> Richard Fairhurst posted something very relavent to this topic at this
> https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1285590975511957504 in particular
Richard Fairhurst posted something very relavent to this topic at this
https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1285590975511957504 in particular
http://theodi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-05-Providing-data-to-OpenStreetMap.pdf
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski
wrote:
> Hi,
>
I think that it is a good summary (disclaimer - I am doing it an extremely tiny
scale, with extremely
small dataset of points).
Exact implementation details depends on what you exactly need - detect deletion
in OSM?
detect missing data in OSM dataset/foreign dataset? Detect differences that
That's exactly how I see it working too. Eventually we could probably put
together a document of best practice, suggestions for the workflow as a
guide for anyone else looking to set this up.
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 14:04, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We expect to encounter the same
Hi All,
We expect to encounter the same problem at the NHVR if we begin to use OSM.
My (possibly unfounded) initial thoughts are based around linking the OSM &
Source feature outside OSM in something similar to a "join" table. The join
might be on attribution (id), geometry or both. Then, you
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 12:33, David Wales wrote:
> Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key?
>
> e.g. some_import_object_id=123456
>
> Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM with
> the key in the source data.
It can be a deterrent to mappers,
I imagine this approach would work better on nodes than on ways.
But I imagine that the number of keys with changed nodes would be much
fewer than the total number of keys, allowing the unchanged nodes to be
easily updated, and reducing the conflation burden.
On 20/7/20 5:24 pm, Mateusz Konieczny
(1) pollution of tags by such keys is irritating
(2) people may split, move, delete, edit or copy such tag
wikidata key is slightly better - but requires wikidata entries
Jul 20, 2020, 04:33 by daviewa...@disroot.org:
> Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key?
>
> e.g.
Hi,
I was thinking of using the ref tag to store the council ID for the object,
and then the council could use the OSMID in their database.
What I was looking for was tools or approaches for keeping the two in sync.
The foreign keys in each system are part of that.
The conflation tools Andew
Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key?
e.g. some_import_object_id=123456
Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM with the
key in the source data.
On 19 July 2020 11:21:04 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg
On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 22:28, Greg Dutkowski
wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for everyone's input.
> Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do.
> It seems inefficient for local government to make their data open and then
> hope the OSM community translates it to OSM tagging.
>
Better for local
Hi,
Thanks for everyone's input.
Sebastien best understood what I am trying to do.
It seems inefficient for local government to make their data open and then
hope the OSM community translates it to OSM tagging. Better for local
government to put their data directly into OSM and maintain a two way
On 9/7/20 7:52 pm, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote:
>
>
>
> Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by greg.dutkow...@gmail.com:
>
> Hi,
> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of
> cycling infrastructure information in OSM.
> Much has been done by volunteers in various
Jul 9, 2020, 06:50 by greg.dutkow...@gmail.com:
> Hi,
> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling
> infrastructure information in OSM.
> Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have done
> lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex
Take a look at... https://opencouncildata.org/ perhaps. There is a mailing
list (quiet at the moment); a set of standards for a bunch of open data (
http://standards.opencouncildata.org/); etc.
There isn't a specific one for cycling infrastructure; but its a good model
they can perhaps follow;
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 14:52, Greg Dutkowski
wrote:
> Hi,
> Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling
> infrastructure information in OSM.
> Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have
> done lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for
Hi,
Bicycle Network Tasmania are trying to improve the quality of cycling
infrastructure information in OSM.
Much has been done by volunteers in various jurisdictions, and we have done
lots locally, but the tagging is quite complex for cycle paths and not
always correct.
Local councils are
19 matches
Mail list logo
