TimSC mapping@... writes:
I have done further investigations. As I said, the national dataset has
about 90% of pharmacies exactly located. But in the Kent data set does
not include this precise data and instead has the postcode centre as the
pharmacy position. IMHO, if we can get permission
I have given the site a face lift:
http://toolserver.org/~timsc/locateservices/
Is there anyone interesting in testing a beta on a different data set? I
would supply the code and help to try to get it imported. Basic HTML
would be good but not necessary. They would also need somewhere to host
Good idea trying to get clarification on the dataset terms and conditions.
I have done further investigations. As I said, the national dataset has
about 90% of pharmacies exactly located. But in the Kent data set does
not include this precise data and instead has the postcode centre as the
On 25/05/2011 23:21, Colin Smale wrote:
Have you tried West Kent PCT?
I'm not sure now, but I think I did.
--
Steve
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
On 25/05/2011 22:54, Steve Doerr wrote:
On 25/05/2011 22:47, TimSC wrote:
On 25/05/11 22:41, Steve Doerr wrote:
I preferred the old version where you didn't have to know about PCTs
and the like :-(
Steve
You mean you can't find the PCT you want? That's a good point. I
wanted to split the
Hi all,
I was thinking about Kent's open data and how we can improve our
mapping. I've been talking to Gregory about missing schools but for some
reason, I chose to look at pharmacies. I was partly inspired by Draco's
post box locator [1]. I thought I could do a web 2.0 annotation of the
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:33 PM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
Any comments?
I think this approach of dealing with external datasets (compare with
OSM, matching, and informing mappers of discrepancies) is the right
direction - see also the Bike Shop Locator [1] that Shaun and I put
I'm told, in private e-mail:
You can get all England from
http://data.gov.uk/dataset/location_of_pharmacies
at least - presumably under the OGL.
On 25 May 2011 14:00, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 25 May 2011 13:33, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I
Thanks for the feedback, all.
I'll have a think about if I can do something about that. Apart from
having to modify the code, the main effort to making this type of data
useful is to do the comparison with OSM to find what is missing. The
post boxes have an obvious reference number
On 25 May 2011 16:59, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I'll have a think about if I can do something about that. Apart from having
to modify the code, the main effort to making this type of data useful is to
do the comparison with OSM to find what is missing. The post boxes have an
Well,
I adapted my code to spit the data into areas and to handle the whole of
the UK. I noticed that about 90% of the entries claim to be within 1m of
the delivery address. From a few tests, it seems to be true. I can see
the marker in google street view exactly where it should be. We
I preferred the old version where you didn't have to know about PCTs and
the like :-(
Steve
On 25/05/2011 22:19, TimSC wrote:
Well,
I adapted my code to spit the data into areas and to handle the whole
of the UK. I noticed that about 90% of the entries claim to be within
1m of the
On 25/05/11 22:33, Chris Hill wrote:
That data looks to be four and a half years old. Importing it en masse
seems inappropriate to me.
The point is it's massively more complete than OSM. Correcting the
imported data would be easier than surveying from scratch. OSM goes out
of date faster
On 25/05/11 22:41, Steve Doerr wrote:
I preferred the old version where you didn't have to know about PCTs
and the like :-(
Steve
You mean you can't find the PCT you want? That's a good point. I wanted
to split the data set by county but that was not reliably in one column
of the
On 25/05/2011 22:47, TimSC wrote:
On 25/05/11 22:41, Steve Doerr wrote:
I preferred the old version where you didn't have to know about PCTs
and the like :-(
Steve
You mean you can't find the PCT you want? That's a good point. I
wanted to split the data set by county but that was not
On 25/05/2011 23:54, Steve Doerr wrote:
On 25/05/2011 22:47, TimSC wrote:
On 25/05/11 22:41, Steve Doerr wrote:
I preferred the old version where you didn't have to know about PCTs
and the like :-(
Steve
You mean you can't find the PCT you want? That's a good point. I
wanted to split the
16 matches
Mail list logo
