[Talk-it] Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

According to the workflow scheme 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sabbioneta) I uploaded the buildings from 
the municipal topographic map ofSabbioneta.Now with my personal IDI am working 
to improve the quality of the map specially in the UNESCO site. 
Thanks


GiorgioL
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,

2018-02-22 14:41 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> It's likely because one of the two building parts must be a multi polygon.
>
>>
> It is better but I still see some issues:
> * A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
> You should use two building:part tags.
> * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
> * There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
> should be more than one).
> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
> separate building.
> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
> building is tagged as different building.
>

I checked again, I hope it's better now .

Many thanks again for your help!!

Giorgio
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,

* A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
> You should use two building:part tags.

* You should also add building=yes to bell towers.


done thanks

* There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
> should be more than one).
> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
> separate building.
> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
> building is tagged as different building.


I made a general check of all the buildings, please review them.

Thanks

Giorgio

2018-02-22 14:41 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane <musur...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Giorgio,
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?
>>
>> For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
>>> is not the only one):
>>> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/
>>
>>
>> yes but that was a problematic one: if I creat two building parts and a
>> building feature that contains them, josm validator marks them as an error.
>> (perhaps for the particular shape). I solved by erasing the lower part that
>> surrounded the main building.
>>
>
> It's likely because one of the two building parts must be a multi polygon.
>
> (and it is not the only one)
>>
>>
>> I checked again, I hope it's better now
>>
>
> It is better but I still see some issues:
> * A bell tower has one tag "man_made:part=tower" which is not documented.
> You should use two building:part tags.
> * You should also add building=yes to bell towers.
> * There is one building with only one building:part=residential tag (there
> should be more than one).
> * In this same building the entrance part of the house is tagged as a
> separate building.
> *The previous example is not the only one where a part of a single
> building is tagged as different building.
>
> Bye,
>
> Andrea
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,

There is still an historic=monument.


Sorry, done.


If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
> way:
> amenity=community_centre
> community_centre=parish_hall
> denomination=catholic
> religion=christian


Ok I fixed


The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
> your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/


I tried to make it clearer, please review them.


Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?

For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
> is not the only one):
> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/


yes but that was a problematic one: if I creat two building parts and a
building feature that contains them, josm validator marks them as an error.
(perhaps for the particular shape). I solved by erasing the lower part that
surrounded the main building.


(and it is not the only one)


I checked again, I hope it's better now


Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
> this review soon :-)


thanks for your patience ;)

bye

2018-02-16 18:16 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane <musur...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Giorgio,
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
>>>
>>
> There is still an historic=monument.
>
>
>> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
>>> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-Febru
>>> ary/062020.html
>>> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions
>>> are welcome.
>>
>>
>> Done thanks
>>
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
> way:
>
> amenity=community_centre
> community_centre=parish_hall
> denomination=catholic
> religion=christian
>
>
>> What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
>>> will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
>>> features and see if they are tagged correctly.
>>> An (old) example is the following:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging
>>
>>
>> Yes my tagging plan it's very simple because the import information are
>> poor. But I will improve the information after the import with a "classic"
>> mapping approach ;)
>>
>
> The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
> your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/
>
>
>> About 3D buildings
>>> There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
>>> building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.
>>> Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
>>> outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
>>> name=*).
>>> If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts,
>>> you must place a building:part tag on each of them.
>>> Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
>>> overall building.
>>
>>
>> You right, I (think) understand that and I fixed the "not residential"
>> buildings
>>
>
> Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?
>
> For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
> is not the only one):
> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/
>
> It should have two building:part tags one for each different section of
> the house (now it only has one).
>
>
>> It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.
>>> Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these
>>> duplicate features.
>>> BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
>>> feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
>>> and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki
>>> /Teatro_all'Antica).
>>
>>
>> Yes, done.
>>
>
> You current OSM file has one duplicate node. You can find it with JOSM
> validator.
>
> Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
> this review soon :-)
>
> Bye,
>
> Andrea
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea,


> Hi Giorgio,
> I fixed some more spelling errors and other mistakes on the wiki page.
> Please review them.


Many thanks

Summarizing, OSM is authorized to derive works from the "Carta Tecnica
> Comunale" and to distribute them under the ODbL but you can't distribute
> the source data. If there's an argument against this, I believe it will be
> written in this ML.


yes...

Anyway the lack of the source data makes it impossible to verify the
> correct tagging. We have to trust your derived OSM file.




The OSM file has a source tag on each feature - please remove them. You'll
> tag the changeset with the source tag, not individual features.


Ok, done

You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-February/062020.html
> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions are
> welcome.


Done thanks

What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
> will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
> features and see if they are tagged correctly.
> An (old) example is the following:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging


Yes my tagging plan it's very simple because the import information are
poor. But I will improve the information after the import with a "classic"
mapping approach ;)

About 3D buildings
> There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
> building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.
> Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
> outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
> name=*).
> If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts, you
> must place a building:part tag on each of them.
> Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
> overall building.


You right, I (think) understand that and I fixed the "not residential"
buildings

BTW, no church has got a name tag. Will you add them? When?


After the import, when I will start to search more information with some
surveys (the import it's just the first step of our work)

It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.
> Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these duplicate
> features.
> BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
> feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
> and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (
> https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teatro_all'Antica).


Yes, done.

Thanks again Andrea for your support.

Giorgio

2018-02-11 20:34 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane <musur...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Giorgio,
> I fixed some more spelling errors and other mistakes on the wiki page.
> Please review them.
>
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I am waiting clarification but I belive this doesn't stop the import (I
>> hope)
>>
>
> Summarizing, OSM is authorized to derive works from the "Carta Tecnica
> Comunale" and to distribute them under the ODbL but you can't distribute
> the source data. If there's an argument against this, I believe it will be
> written in this ML.
>
> Anyway the lack of the source data makes it impossible to verify the
> correct tagging. We have to trust your derived OSM file.
>
>
>> > The data still have some issue:
>>> >> - adjacent buildings that are not connected
>>> >> - a building has self-intersecting way
>>>
>>
>>
> The OSM file has a source tag on each feature - please remove them. You'll
> tag the changeset with the source tag, not individual features.
>
> You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
>
> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-
> February/062020.html
>
>
>> This has been discussed in the past in the talk-it ML.
>>> The tag man_made=campanile is documented in the wiki but is used only 791
>>> times. Moreover the picture refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is
>>> completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a
>>> c

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

 On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Andrea Musuruane 
wrote:

Hi Andrea,

I understand this is your first import (and I definitely hope it's not your
> last!). It's really difficult to get things right the first time. Imports
> are not easy tasks - there are so much things to pay attention to.
> I find your goal valuable. Having buildings for Sabbioneta (BTW, it's nice
> place I visited some moons ago :-)) in OSM is definitely welcome.


Yes I was joking, really thank you for your time. I hope our work could
help future import processes.


> > The "Schedule" chapter is missing.
> >>
> >
> Fine, but English can be improved:



*The Municipality of Sabbioneta released a written permission in December
> 2017 stating it allows works derived from the "Carta Tecnica Comunale" to
> be distributed under the ODbL. My aim is to upload building data by the end
> of February 2018. *
>
> > "Import Type" section in "Import Data" chapter is missing. You should
> >> likely say your import is a one-time import, you won't use automated
> >> scripts, all the tags will be entered manually and data will be
> imported in
> >> the OSM database using JOSM.
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope that everything is clearer now
> >
> >
> Yes, much better, thanks.
> English can be improved:
> *This is a one-time import. The dataset will be uploaded as a single
> changeset without using an automated script. All the tags will be entered
> manually and the dataset will be uploaded using JOSM.*


Done thank you

> You should upload the original dataset.
> >
> >
> >
> > I can't. the Municipality license it's just to extract the data and share
> > throught Osm.
> >
> >
> I think it's fine but, if possible, I'd like to have a more authoritative
> (i.e. legal) opinion about this: we can't see the source data set but we're
> allowed to derive works from it.



> "Data license" should link to a text copy of the ODbL.
> >> "Type of license" should be "ODbL".
> >
> >
> >
> > Done (I hope)
> >
> >
> This is strictly linked with the previous point.
> *Data license:* *proprietary* (owned by the Municipality of Sabbioneta)
> [...]
> *ODbL Compliance verified:* Municipality of Sabbioneta has agreed to
> license *derived* data under the ODbL
> .


I am waiting clarification but I belive this doesn't stop the import (I
hope)

> The data still have some issue:
> >> - adjacent buildings that are not connected
> >> - a building has self-intersecting ways
> >
> >
> > Fix it, sorry Josm marked as Advertising and I ignored them.
> >
> >
> JOSM validator still shows two warnings you must address.


Yes now


>
> > - churches are tagged with "denominati" (it should be denomination)
> >
> >
> > Yes sorry was a mistake depending to the shp field name limitation...
> >
> >
> Now the OSM file has both the "denominati"  and " "denomination" tags :-(


Yes sorry...  

>
> > - bell towers are tagged with man_made=campanile (shouldn't it be
> >> man_made=tower + tower:type=bell_tower?) and without the building tag.
> See
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dbell_tower
> >
> >
> > I found it in the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org
> > /wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcampanile
> >
> >
> This has been discussed in the past in the talk-it ML.
> The tag man_made=campanile is documented in the wiki but is used only 791
> times. Moreover the picture refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is
> completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a campanile
> is man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower (used 10595 times). Even the
> man_made=campanile wiki page suggest to use this tagging.


Ok, at the beginning when I found "Campanile" I said "this is
perfect!!" and I haven't search further...

> some buildings are split in different parts (still tagged as building=*)
> >> and you assign different heights to them. I'm not an expert about this
> but
> >> it seems this is not the right procedure. Please read
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height#Height_of_buildings and
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings
> >
> >
> > Was identified all single buildings that have different height to add in
> a
> > future mapping phase other tag to improve the detail map (level, color,
> > roof_,shape, etc.). That was made with a manually split procedure but I
> > have splited only the building (not the building part).
> >
> >
> Your tagging is wrong. Look at the following example.
> [image: Inline image 1]
> This is a house. It is a single building. This also means you should have
> only one building tag on the building outline.
> But you made two buildings (i.e. with two building tags): one for the lower
> part (a multi polygon) and one for the higher part (a closed way). But
> different parts must be tagged with building:part as explained on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings


Yes now I have understud and you are absolutely right, I fixed that and the
other 

[Talk-it] Fwd: Re: [Imports] Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018, Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com wrote:

Ciao Giorgio,
> I always find your e-mails in the spam folder because the "message has a
> from address in yahoo.it but has failed yahoo.it's required tests for
> authentication".



I am apologize, I try with my google mail account



> You didn't provide any documentation at that time. It was just a single
> mail about a possible import. You then disappeared for about 3 and a half
> months.



You right but please consider that for me was not so easy to describe the
import plan to the Municipality of Sabbioneta (what is OSM, why it’s
important to share the information, etc.) and after this to obtain the
license.



> I do believe it's not a complex import but the review process is performed
> to find possible issues and avoid later troubles with bad imported data
> (and I already found out some problems with your translated data). There is
> no need to rush :-)



Ok I understand, I’ll go slower, I just hope not to stop ;) About this I am
really sorry for all this mails but I thought that the import procedure was
less complicated because it's my first -and maybe the last- time that I
propose an import. At last I just want to underline that it's very
important for the goals of our projects because the OSM map don't have
building in the UNESCO site (otherwise I wouldn't ever had propose an
import process).



> The "About & Goals" chapter you use past tenses but most of the actions
> still have to happen.
> The "Schedule" chapter is missing.
> "Import Type" section in "Import Data" chapter is missing. You should
> likely say your import is a one-time import, you won't use automated
> scripts, all the tags will be entered manually and data will be imported in
> the OSM database using JOSM.



I hope that everything is clearer now



> You should upload the original dataset.



I can't. the Municipality license it's just to extract the data and share
throught Osm.



> "Data license" should link to a text copy of the ODbL.
> "Type of license" should be "ODbL".



Done (I hope)



> It's fine for me, but please note that you have entered an unwanted space
> in the wiki (source= Comune di Sabbioneta - Carta Tecnica Comunale).



Fixed.



> As I said, I strongly encourage to use them.
> Source data license is not implied. Different data sources can be
> distributed under different licenses.
>
> I noticed that logging in is required to download the data. This is not
> very friendly towards people without a gmail account. Can you please remove
> this limitation?



I move it in Dropbox hope it's better.

> The data still have some issue:
> - adjacent buildings that are not connected
> - a building has self-intersecting ways


Fix it, sorry Josm marked as Advertising and I ignored them.


- churches are tagged with "denominati" (it should be denomination)


Yes sorry was a mistake depending to the shp field name limitation...


- bell towers are tagged with man_made=campanile (shouldn't it be
> man_made=tower + tower:type=bell_tower?) and without the building tag. See
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dbell_tower


I found it in the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org
/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcampanile



> some buildings are split in different parts (still tagged as building=*)
> and you assign different heights to them. I'm not an expert about this but
> it seems this is not the right procedure. Please read
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height#Height_of_buildings and
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings


Was identified all single buildings that have different height to add in a
future mapping phase other tag to improve the detail map (level, color,
roof_,shape, etc.). That was made with a manually split procedure but I
have splited only the building (not the building part).



> I have some troubles with your conflation phase which is summarized as
> "Merge the tag and the history of the existing features through the JOSM
> Utilsplugin2 plugin;".  It's not clear, at least to me, how Utilsplugin2 is
> helpful in this context. I suppose (because you didn't write it) you'll use
> the "Copy tags from previous selection (Shift+R)" feature.



That was my original plan



> BTW, isn't it simpler and less error prone to use the "More Tools ->
> Replace geometry" tool?



That was a suggestion from the talk-it, but I will return to my original
plan.



> QA phase is still missing. Do you plan to use some kind of validator
> (e.g.. JOSM validator)? When? Do you plan to do some kind of post import
> verification? How?



QA it's made. As I wrote above after the import I will work a lot on the
Sabbioneta area so I will verification and monitoring all the changeset and
I will any potential mistakes.


many thank for your helps


Giorgio
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [Imports] Sabbioneta buildings import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Hi Andrea thank you for your feedbacks
>  I think you're rushing this import. You sent the email on talk-it just 4 
>days >ago. You should allow more time to reviewers to examine your proposal.

Yes you right but I have send my first mail about this import to the talk-it in 
october the 17th. In add you have to consider that this import is not very 
complex in term of number of features and complexity of the process, but off 
course I'll be waiting the ok of the OSM community first.
>Your proposal miss some of the parts detailed in the 
>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Plan_Outline. I really suggest you 
>>to use it as a template and fill the different sections.

I try to fill all the sections that could be explain well the import process  
>There is no link to the original data set.
The original dataset is not an online source, but I add this information in the 
proposal.
>In the licence section, please add the the Municipality of Sabbioneta has 
>agreed to license the data under the ODbL. Do not suppose non Italian speakers 
>can read the waiver.
You perfectly right, I hope now it's clear.
>Tagging the changeset with "source=Carta Tecnica Comunale" is not good enough. 
>It does not link the data to your import. It >would be better to tag it like 
>the following:>source=Comune di 
>Sabbioneta>source:license=ODbL>type=import>url=https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sabbioneta>The
> source tag is mandatory. I strongly encourage to use the other ones too.
Could be good "source=Comune di Sabbioneta - Carta Tecnica Comunale"? About the 
other tags I gonna add all if you think it's the right way to do but I wonder: 
Why remark that the license is ODbl? Isn''t implied?
>The resulting OSM file has a lot of duplicate nodes and nodes of adjacent 
>buildings not connected. You can check them using JOSM >validator.>In 
>multi-polygons, there are some tags that are probably a leftover from the 
>original dataset: OBJECTID, Entity.

I fixed them, I hope it's all right now.
>The conflation phase is missing. How do you plan to conflate existing 
>buildings and imported ones?>The revert plan is missing.>The QA phase is 
>missing.>I guess you are the only one that will perform this import. Please 
>state it in the "Team Approach" section along with your your >current OSM 
>username (GiorgioL) and import username (GiorgioL-import).
I hope that I have added all the requested informations.
Many thanks for your help
Giorgio








   ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Sabbioneta progetto Cerchio d'Acqua e richiesta supporto per possibile import (Giorgio)

[Giorgio Limonta]

Grazie Andrea per la mail in privato dove mi ha dato alcuni consigli su come 
impostare la pagina dell'import, seguirò l'esempio della loro pagina realizzata 
per l'import degli edifici in provincia di Biella 
Il 01/02/2018 13:42:48 Alessandro ha scritto>Ciao Giorgio premesso che dei 99 
building presenti in OSM nel comune 22 sono 'miei' ed ho impostato solo 
building=yes Nella pagina dell'import dovresti scrivere >che i tag e l'history 
degli oggetti verranno preservati. Con JOSM è¨ possibile farlo tramite il 
plugin utilsplugin2

Grazie lo farò sicuramente anche perché dovrò rivedere tutta la pagina 
dell'import. Non ero a conoscenza del plugin avrei copiato e incollato i tag e 
i valori mancanti dalla vecchia feature a quella nuova l'altra ma meglio questo 
metodo ;)
Il 01/02/2018 19:51:46 Simone ha scritto
>Basta la firma di un Responsabile del servizio tecnico del Comune e non >del 
>sindaco?
Non so cosa si intenda per "basta" ma è sicuramente la persona responsabile del 
Comune che gestisce gli aspetti territoriali (se ci fosse lo sarebbe anche del 
SIT), comunque ovviamente il Sindaco e la componente politica di Sabbioneta 
sono a conoscenza dei progetti di valorizzazione in corso e le finalità di 
diffusione delle informazioni, che hanno in questa questa procedura di import 
una fase importante per creare la base sulla quale caricare le informazioni 
geografiche raccolte e che andremo a raccogliere. Vi assicuro che non è stato 
semplice spiegare perché mi servisse questa liberatoria e soprattutto ottenerla.

 Giorgio Limontamobile +393384635443








Message: 7
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 19:51:46 +0100
From: liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu 
To: talk-it@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] Sabbioneta progetto Cerchio d'Acqua e richiesta
    supporto per possibile import
Message-ID: <70debe4c-ef2f-0a6a-7882-535184447...@posteo.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Il 01/02/2018 19:41, Alessandro ha scritto:
> Il 01/02/2018 17:41, Andrea Musuruane ha scritto:
>> Ciao,
>>
> 
> 
>> Perdonami, ma non ho capito bene e non riesco ad aprire l'autorizzazione.
>>
>> In pratica il Comune vi ha concesso il ricalco delle ortofoto di sua 
>> proprietà e poi sulla base di queste avete ricalcato i vari edifici?
>>
> 
> Ciao,
> qui (1) la pagina wiki dove trovi il link diretto (2) al pdf della 
> liberatoria.
> 
> Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT
> 
> 
> 1) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lombardia/MN/Sabbioneta
> 2) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Sabbioneta_liberatoriaOSM.PDF
> 

Basta la firma di un Responsabile del servizio tecnico del Comune e non 
del sindaco?


-- 
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli




   ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Sabbioneta progetto Cerchio d'Acqua e richiesta supporto per possibile import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Buongiorno lista,
relativamente alla procedura di import connessa al progetto in oggetto, di cui 
alle mie precedenti mail di ottobre, vi aggiorno sul fatto che il Comune di 
Sabbioneta ci ha autorizzato formalmente ad utilizzare il materiale 
cartografico proveniente dall'aerofotogrammetrico per la diffusione tramite OSM 
come meglio descritto e documentato nella pagina wiki dedicata [1] per la quale 
ringrazio ancora Ale_Zena per il prezioso supporto e la consueta disponibilità. 
Ho pertanto estrapolato dall'aerofogrammetrico comunale le geometrie 
dell'edificato della parte della città murata e di un buffer esterno di circa 
1km per un totale di 1130 nuove feature per le quali ho verificato puntualmente 
la correttezza topologica e la relativa altezza utile. Per gli altri edifici 
dell'immenso territorio comunale di Sabbioneta procederò con un import 
successivo perché al momento ho la necessità di migliorare la mappa di base 
dell'area UNESCO per caricare anche le altre informazioni connesse al progetto, 
per le quali tra l'altro realizzeremo delle riprese aree con un drone per 
produrre materiali informativi da diffondere (anche tramite i canali Wikimedia) 
per migliorare la conoscenza e la mappatura del sito (se riusciamo vorremmo 
realizzare delle immagini zenitali dell'area da diffondere anche tramite un 
servizio WMS, ma questo dipenderà molto dalla qualità delle riprese).
A questo link [2] trovate il file .osm per chiunque volesse verificare la 
correttezza delle feature e dei relativi tag, ho inoltre creato la pagina wiki 
dell'import [3] cercando di evidenziare (spero) chiaramente i passaggi 
effettuati.
Se non c'è nulla di problematico procederei all'import al più presto ovviamente 
integrando le informazioni già presenti su OSM.
Grazie in anticipo
Buona giornata
Giorgio

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lombardia/MN/Sabbioneta[2] 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1fTEcxMFFP_iUlkZxFWi8QAKWLXDBCFhN
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sabbioneta



___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] disused:

[Giorgio Limonta]

> Veramente è stato oggetto di tante discussioni, e una volta tanto si era
> giunti a una conclusione...

> Considera un ristorante taggato con amenity=restaurant.
> Un giorno questo ristorante chiude, come riflettere il cambiamento sulla
> mappa?
> Se aggiungi disused=yes, il ristorante continuerà a comparire con la sua
> icona, verrà ancora restituito a chi interroga i dati cercando un
> ristorante, ecc.
> L'utilizzo di una chiave diversa ti permette invece di aggiornare
>l'informazione evitando confusioni.

Perfettamente d'accordo e trovo inoltre personalmente molto utile il prefisso 
"disused:" avendo intrapreso con il Politecnico di Milano alcuni studi sulla 
mappatura e il monitoraggio delle attività commerciali utilizzando OSM (vedi il 
link seguente http://www.urbecom.polimi.it/mappatura_monitoraggio_osm/) 
Buona serata a tutti
GiorgioL


   ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Sabbioneta progetto Cerchio d'Acqua e richiesta supporto per possibile import

[Giorgio Limonta]

Buongiorno lista, 
vi scrivo per alcuni consigli relativamente ad un potenziale import chevorrei 
attivare. Sto collaborando ad un progetto per la valorizzazioneculturale delle 
mura e degli arginelli d’acqua della città di Sabbioneta (sitoUNESCO), il 
progetto prevede la realizzazione di molti studi e rilievi chedovrebbero 
portare alla raccolta di una molteplicità di informazioni di varianatura 
(percorsi ciclabili, rilievo specie arboree, etc.) che ovviamentesaranno 
condivise attraverso un sito internet 
(http://www.amiciambientesabbioneta.it/cerchiodacqua/)e un geoblog. Ho proposto 
ai membridel progetto di condividere le informazioni raccolte non solo con i 
mezzi web“classici” ma arricchendo anche i canali di condivisione delle 
informazioni delmondo Wikimedia ed in particolare di OpenStreetMap. Nel recente 
passato ho giàavuto esperienze simili ma per altre finalità. Fatta questa 
premessa ho notato che in OSM Sabbioneta èscarsamente mappata e mi piacerebbe 
quantomeno inserire la parte edificatainterna alle mura (ma non solo) per 
ricostruire una base dati sulla quale “agganciare”le diverse informazioni che 
raccoglieremo ma anche banalmente per ricostruireuna cartografia di sfondo 
adeguata per il geoblog. Il mio obiettivo sarebbequello di fare quello che 
Ale_Zena ha già fatto per il comune di Treviglio. PurtroppoSabbioneta come 
molti dei comuni del mantovano non ha ancora un DBTopograficorilasciato da 
Regione Lombardia sotto licenza IODL 2.0 (ne presenta unosemplificato DBTS con 
un dettaglio cartografico di 1:10.000 [1]) perciò pensavodi utilizzare 
l’aerofotogrammetrico che però ovviamente non presenta unalicenza esplicita in 
quanto non realizzato secondo le disposizioni normativesuccessive alla Lr 
12/2005. Da qui le mie domande: 1.   Per l’import posso utilizzare un 
genericoaccount tipo “GiorgioL_import” che potrei utilizzare anche per 
successiviimport o ne devo creare uno specifico per Sabbioneta?; 2.   Visto che 
si tratta di un import di piccolaentità devo creare comunque una pagina ad hoc 
all’interno della wiki di OSM? a.   Ho visto che esistono una serie di moduli 
giàpronti per la richiesta di pubblicazione di materiale cartografico prodotto 
conlicenza diversa da quella di OSM ma si riferisce comunque a materiale 
Opendata,io credo di essere nel caso descritto qua [2] nella wiki di OSM perciò 
michiedevo se ci fosse un modulo da cui partire da inoltrare al comune 
perfarmelo girare firmato. Poi questo modulo lo pubblico nella pagina 
wikidedicata?    Scusate per l’eccessiva lunghezza della mail e vi 
ringrazioanticipatamente per le risposte che vorrete inviarmi    Giorgio    [1] 
http://www.geoportale.regione.lombardia.it/specifiche-tecniche#point3 [2] 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:FAQ#Perch.C3.A9_non_posso_usare_le_mappe_catastali.2C_i_piani_regolatori_o_i_CTR.3F
 

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Questione barrato nei civici

[Giorgio Limonta]

>Ciao!
>Allora, lo "standard" italiano per i numeri civici dovrebbe essere 
>n.civico + lettera in minuscolo per il barrato (es. 100a, 99g, 1e).

>Nell'importazione dei numeri civici del friuli venezia giulia abbiamo 
>deciso di usare n.civico + / + lettera in maiuscolo per il barrato (es. 
>100/A 99/G, 1/E) proprio perché tanti barrati erano composti da numeri e 
>quindi lo "standard" italiano non regge in questi casi.

>Però molte volte mi è venuto il dubbio che forse era meglio usare lo 
>standard "italiano" e solo per i barrati con numero usare lo standard 
>adottato da noi. Ma poi mi rendo conto che forse abbiamo fatto bene, 
>forse... chi lo sa? Almeno così abbiamo per tutta la regione un modo  
>univoco per taggare i civici...

>Alcuni numeri presi oggi con overpass-turbo per i civici del fvg:

>totale numeri civici in fvg: 425.125
>totale civici con barrato numerico: 21.128 (circa il 5%)

>A voi le conclusioni

>Ciao
>Damjan

Grazie mille per il chiarimento, mi permetto solo di evidenziare che la 
questione subalterno numerico non è limitata solamente al Friuli, ho infatti 
notato che viene utilizzato anche in altre realtà italiane (es. Bologna, Parma, 
Bergamo, Milano) anche se, come giustamente facevi notare tu, rappresenta un 
piccola percentuale rispetto al totale dei civici direi anche inferiore a 
quella emersa in FVG, perciò effettivamente potrebbe essere introdotto il "/" 
solo per i subalterni numerici mantenendo lo standard per gli altri?
ciaoGL 


   ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Questione barrato nei civici

[Giorgio Limonta]

Buongiorno a tutti,
pongo una questione circa le modalità con cui si indicano i barrati nel tag 
"addr:housenumber" che so già essere stata tratta in precedenza ma che non mi 
sembra ancora pienamente chiarita, almeno stando a guardare alcuni comuni per i 
quali è stato effettuato l'import dei civici. Non sarebbe meglio aggiungere il 
carattere "/" tra il numero civico e il subalterno considerando che a volte lo 
stesso è ancora un numero (1/1, 1/10, etc...)? 
Grazie per il chiarimento
G.L.___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] The floating piers e come taggare gli oggetti scomparsi

[Giorgio Limonta]

Buongiorno a tutti,
ho visto che su OSM è stato mappato il percorso di "The floating piers" e mi è 
sorto un dubbio: al termine dell'evento, con la rimozione dell'opera d'arte, 
verrà rimossa anche l'informazione o verrà mantenuta utilizzando ad esempio il 
tag "removed:highway", oppure utilizzando gli interessantissimi tag 
"start_date" e "end_date" introdotti per le historic map e utilizzate per 
indicare oggetti rimossi o demoliti? A tal proposito ho notato che gli oggetti 
che presentano l'indicazione del tag "end_date" rimangono comunque visibili 
nella visualizzazione standard di OSM. Ne ho forse frainteso l'utilità?
Vi ringrazio anticipatamente Giorgio 
  Da: "talk-it-requ...@openstreetmap.org" 

 A: talk-it@openstreetmap.org 
 Inviato: Martedì 21 Giugno 2016 15:37
 Oggetto: Digest di Talk-it, Volume 115, Numero 63
  
Invia le richieste di iscrizione alla lista Talk-it all'indirizzo
    talk-it@openstreetmap.org

Per iscriverti o cancellarti attraverso il web, visita
    https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
oppure, via email, manda un messaggio con oggetto `help' all'indirizzo
    talk-it-requ...@openstreetmap.org

Puoi contattare la persona che gestisce la lista all'indirizzo
    talk-it-ow...@openstreetmap.org

Se rispondi a questo messaggio, per favore edita la linea dell'oggetto
in modo che sia più utile di un semplice "Re: Contenuti del digest
della lista Talk-it..."


Argomenti del Giorno:

  1. Re: fontanella non potabile (Andrea Albani)
  2. Re: fontanella non potabile (Daniele Gitto)
  3. "passaggio a livello" aeroporto (Daniele Gitto)
  4. Re: "passaggio a livello" aeroporto (Fabrizio Tambussa)
  5. Re: "passaggio a livello" aeroporto (Daniele Gitto)
  6. Re: OSM per gestione sentieri ? (Alfredo Gattai)


--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:05:29 +0200
From: Andrea Albani 
To: openstreetmap list - italiano 
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] fontanella non potabile
Message-ID:
    
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

amenty=fountain mi sembra più indicato per fontane e simili.

Secondo me fra tutti i tag possibili forse la combinazione che più si
avvicina è:

man_made=water_tap
drinking_water=no

In quella che hai citato non c'è un rubinetto, ma da "specifica" sul wiki
sembra sia comunque accettabile.

Ciao
-- parte successiva --
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: 


--

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:16:45 +0200
From: Daniele Gitto 
To: openstreetmap list - italiano 
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] fontanella non potabile
Message-ID: <26e827ff-3a84-4bda-b503-02b5ff915...@email.android.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: 


--

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:26:25 +0200
From: Daniele Gitto 
To: talk-it@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-it] "passaggio a livello" aeroporto
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: 


--

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:35:54 +0200
From: Fabrizio Tambussa 
To: openstreetmap list - italiano 
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] "passaggio a livello" aeroporto
Message-ID:
    
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Il 21/Giu/2016 14:27, "Daniele Gitto"  ha scritto:
>
> Salve, domanda del primo pomeriggio: chiedono di inserire le barriere a
sollevamento su una strada che però non incrocia nulla, servono solo a
fermare il traffico durante decolli e atterraggi nella vicina pista di
Venegono.
> Mi sono bloccato perché è certo qualche barrier ma la condizione è solo
temporale (proprio come quella di un passaggio a livello, o di un semaforo)
> Esiste qualche modo? O ci piazzo un semaforo virtuale, che probabilmente
c'è davvero.
>
> Daniele Gitto

barrier=lift_gate è per una sbarra che si solleva, tipo passaggio a livello.
Controlla il wiki ma mi sembra quello che più si avvicina.
Saluti
Sbiribizio
-- parte successiva --
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: 


--

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:29:06 +0200
From: Daniele