Re: [Talk-us] Proposed import of building footprints for Hartford, CT

[Clifford Snow]

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 6:59 PM, William Theaker 
wrote:

>
> I'm planning on importing building footprints and address points from the
> City of Hartford's open data portal:
> http://gisdata.hartford.gov
>
> The data is CC-BY and I'm working on getting a waiver from the City of
> Hartford.
>
> I've documented my import plan here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hartford_Import
>
> I started out editing OSM by tracing buildings in the Hartford area almost
> a decade ago and I'm excited to import this high quality data.
>
> Any feedback or offers to collaborate on this import would be greatly
> appreciated.
>
>
> William,
This looks like a fun project. Hopefully you can find others in the area
that would like to help out. Please join us on Slack [1] to help discuss
the import.

You might look into  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Conflator to
see if it will help with existing buildings.

Can you explain how the shapefiles will be converted to OSM, along with the
tags? For example, if you are Paul Norman osm2ogr.py script to convert from
shapefile to osm, please post the relevant part of the translation script.

Also, when you get there, can you upload some sample data for us to review.

[1] https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/

Good luck,
Clifford



-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Proposed import of building footprints for Hartford, CT

[William Theaker]

Hello,

I'm planning on importing building footprints and address points from the
City of Hartford's open data portal:
http://gisdata.hartford.gov

The data is CC-BY and I'm working on getting a waiver from the City of
Hartford.

I've documented my import plan here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hartford_Import

I started out editing OSM by tracing buildings in the Hartford area almost
a decade ago and I'm excited to import this high quality data.

Any feedback or offers to collaborate on this import would be greatly
appreciated.

William Theaker
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Joel Holdsworth]

Zoe, I'm not surprised that most OSM contributors are blokes. But what would 
make you think that indicates any kind of bias? People choose what they want to 
give their time to. I really don't mind what demographics contribute - it 
doesn't matter, so long as it's open to all - which osm certainly is.

You should talk to a psychologist - they would be able to explain why the 
demographics are what they are, but that's academic as far as I'm concerned. 

Best Regards
Joel Holdsworth

On September 4, 2017 4:45:27 AM MDT, Zoe Gardner  wrote:
>Dear OSM talk subscriber
>
> 
>
>I am a Research Fellow in the Nottingham Geospatial Institute at the
>University of Nottingham in the UK, interested in participation biases
>in geospatial crowdsourced projects such as OSM and other Volunteered
>Geographical Information (VGI) projects. My current research project is
>concerned with the way in which participation biases in OSM may
>potentially affect the usability of the data that is collected and
>subsequently what is available to location based service providers
>which use OSM as their primary geospatial database.
>
> 
>
>The project is motivated by recent research that has found a strong
>male bias in OSM participation. This has led to assertions that various
>geospatial knowledge could be under represented or poorly recorded on
>the map. However, the actual consequences of this bias remain little
>explored or reported. By collecting information about contributors to
>OSM, which can then be analyzed along with their editing patterns, the
>impacts of this bias might begin to be measured and therefore better
>understood. I have therefore published an online survey designed to
>collect information directly from OSM editors and I would like to
>invite as many of you as possible to participate. The survey is
>anonymous and takes a couple of minutes to complete.
>
> 
>
>If you are an OSM contributor and are interested in or would like to
>participate in the study, please click on the link below, which will
>take you to the Bristol Online Survey website where you will find more
>information and an opportunity to participate in the survey. As a small
>incentive, at the close of the survey in a few weeks’ time, 60
>respondents will be drawn at random to receive a £15 Amazon voucher.
>
> 
>
>To participate in the survey, click on the link below:
>
> 
>
>https://nottingham.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/osm-user-profiles
>
> 
>
>Please do think about participating. It is hoped that knowledge about
>the way participation biases impact on crowdsourced maps will enable
>new strategies to be developed to address any resulting voids in the
>geospatial information provided by amateur mappers. In turn this could
>strengthen the role played by platforms such as OSM in urban planning
>and sustainability and raise the profile of the important mapping work
>that you all do.
>
> 
>
>In the meantime, if you would like to know more about me, my research
>activities or the project, please visit my University webpage (link
>below) and do not hesitate to get in touch directly or via the OSM
>messaging service.
>
> 
>
>https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/engineering/people/zoe.gardner
>
> 
>
>Thank you
>
>Zoe
>
> 
>
> 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] The Republic of Molossia (and other micro-nations)

[Dave Swarthout]

IMO it seems absurd to condone this sort of mapping. It isn't accepted as a
sovereign nation by the U.S. government and probably does not exist on any
other reputable maps. Place=locality or place=neighbourhood would be fine
although even then the name Molossia is a pure invention. Native-American
areas are, on the contrary, recognized and hence deserving of such a
boundary tag. (I haven't checked this but assume its' the case).

Another issue is, where will it end? Can I feel free to create my own
"republic", e.g., the Republic of Swarthout?

My 2 cents

AlaskaDave

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Bradley White 
wrote:

> Something a little bit different:
>
> The Republic of Molossia is a self-declared "micro-nation" located
> near Dayton, NV, landlocked by the United States. The nation claims
> full sovereignty from the United States; however, it is recognized by
> neither the United States, nor any other country on Earth, as an
> independent nation. You have probably heard about it before, since it
> is one of the best-known examples of such a micro-nation in the US.
>
> Within the past few months, this "nation" has popped into OSM,
> complete with sloppily implemented "admin_level=2" and
> "boundary=national" tags, view-able here:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/39.32281/-119.53908. My
> discussion point is whether this is a valid use of these tags. A
> handful of quick searches about this topic didn't turn up anything for
> me, so I'm assuming no precedent has been set yet. It is worth noting
> that this is not the only micro-nation in the US.
>
> I'm not inclined to think these tags are valid. Otherwise, there's
> nothing stopping me from calling my backyard its own nation, slapping
> together a wikipedia article, and entering it into OSM as a
> full-fledged nation. However, since they are still geographically
> based entities of interest to the public, I think they are worth
> mapping
>
> There is a proposal for disputed boundaries, but I don't think that's
> valid either since there isn't really a dispute. The nation has gone
> unacknowledged by the United States, and nothing has gone through the
> legal process between the two nations (that I'm aware of) that could
> constitute a "dispute". No other boundary tag is really applicable,
> maybe a new "boundary=micronation" would work? De facto, US law still
> applies in these "micronations", along with the law of whatever
> jurisdictions the micronation belongs to, so I don't think an
> admin_level tag is applicable.
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Zoe Gardner]

Dear OSM talk subscriber

 

I am a Research Fellow in the Nottingham Geospatial Institute at the University 
of Nottingham in the UK, interested in participation biases in geospatial 
crowdsourced projects such as OSM and other Volunteered Geographical 
Information (VGI) projects. My current research project is concerned with the 
way in which participation biases in OSM may potentially affect the usability 
of the data that is collected and subsequently what is available to location 
based service providers which use OSM as their primary geospatial database.

 

The project is motivated by recent research that has found a strong male bias 
in OSM participation. This has led to assertions that various geospatial 
knowledge could be under represented or poorly recorded on the map. However, 
the actual consequences of this bias remain little explored or reported. By 
collecting information about contributors to OSM, which can then be analyzed 
along with their editing patterns, the impacts of this bias might begin to be 
measured and therefore better understood. I have therefore published an online 
survey designed to collect information directly from OSM editors and I would 
like to invite as many of you as possible to participate. The survey is 
anonymous and takes a couple of minutes to complete.

 

If you are an OSM contributor and are interested in or would like to 
participate in the study, please click on the link below, which will take you 
to the Bristol Online Survey website where you will find more information and 
an opportunity to participate in the survey. As a small incentive, at the close 
of the survey in a few weeks’ time, 60 respondents will be drawn at random to 
receive a £15 Amazon voucher.

 

To participate in the survey, click on the link below:

 

https://nottingham.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/osm-user-profiles 

 

Please do think about participating. It is hoped that knowledge about the way 
participation biases impact on crowdsourced maps will enable new strategies to 
be developed to address any resulting voids in the geospatial information 
provided by amateur mappers. In turn this could strengthen the role played by 
platforms such as OSM in urban planning and sustainability and raise the 
profile of the important mapping work that you all do.

 

In the meantime, if you would like to know more about me, my research 
activities or the project, please visit my University webpage (link below) and 
do not hesitate to get in touch directly or via the OSM messaging service.

 

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/engineering/people/zoe.gardner 

 

Thank you

Zoe

 

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

[Talk-us] Fwd: Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Charlotte Wolter]

Follks,

It would be nice if we could get some 
confirmation that this is a real research 
projects being done by an actual researcher at 
Nottingham. If it is legit, why is the return 
email address from Gmail rather than the university?
Is there some mechanism that we can set 
up to confirm that the research is for real, such 
as running it through the US board first? I don't 
mind contributing to a survey. I just want to be sure it is for real.


Charlotte




From: Zoe Gardner 
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org ...snip... talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM



Dear OSM talk subscriber

I am a Research Fellow in the Nottingham 
Geospatial Institute at the University of 
Nottingham in the UK, interested in 
participation biases in geospatial crowd-sourced 
projects such as OSM and other Volunteered 
Geographical Information (VGI) projects. My 
current research project is concerned with the 
way in which participation biases in OSM may 
potentially affect the usability of the data 
that is collected and subsequently what is 
available to location-based service providers 
that use OSM as their primary geospatial database.
The project is motivated by recent research that 
has found a strong male bias in OSM 
participation. This has led to assertions that 
various geospatial knowledge could be under 
represented or poorly recorded on the map. 
However, the actual consequences of this bias 
remain little explored or reported. By 
collecting information about contributors to 
OSM, which can then be analyzed along with their 
editing patterns, the impacts of this bias might 
begin to be measured and therefore better 
understood. I have therefore published an online 
survey designed to collect information directly 
from OSM editors and I would like to invite as 
many of you as possible to participate. The 
survey is anonymous and takes a couple of minutes to complete.
If you are an OSM contributor and are interested 
in or would like to participate in the study, 
please click on the link below, which will take 
you to the Bristol Online Survey website where 
you will find more information and an 
opportunity to participate in the survey. As a 
small incentive, at the close of the survey in a 
few weeks' time, 60 respondents will be drawn at 
random to receive a £15 Amazon voucher.

To participate in the survey, click on the link below:
https://nottingham.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/osm-user-profiles
Please do think about participating. It is hoped 
that knowledge about the way participation 
biases impact on crowd-sourced maps will enable 
new strategies to be developed to address any 
resulting voids in the geospatial information 
provided by amateur mappers. In turn this could 
strengthen the role played by platforms such as 
OSM in urban planning and sustainability, and 
could raise the profile of the important mapping work that you all do.
In the meantime, if you would like to know more 
about me, my research activities or the project, 
please visit my University webpage (link below) 
and do not hesitate to get in touch directly or via the OSM messaging service.

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/engineering/people/zoe.gardner
Thank you

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



Charlotte Wolter
927 18th Street Suite A
Santa Monica, California
90403
+1-310-597-4040
techl...@techlady.com
Skype: thetechlady

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

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[ajt1047]

  If it helps, I can confirm that I have met the researcher concerned at an OSM meetup in Nottingham. We talked about the project a bit, and what's been said about the research here doesn't differ from what was s‎aid then.Happy to answer questions from the US board if anyone thinks it will add to the "web of trust" here :)From: Charlotte WolterSent: Monday, 4 September 2017 19:25To: Talk-US@openstreetmap.orgSubject: [Talk-us] Fwd:  Open survey on participation biases in OSM

Follks,
It would
be nice if we could get some confirmation that this is a real research
projects being done by an actual researcher at Nottingham. If it is
legit, why is the return email address from Gmail rather than the
university?
Is there
some mechanism that we can set up to confirm that the research is for
real, such as running it through the US board first? I don't mind
contributing to a survey. I just want to be sure it is for real.
Charlotte

From: Zoe Gardner

To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org ...snip... talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM
 
 
Dear OSM talk subscriber
 
I am a Research Fellow in the Nottingham Geospatial Institute at the
University of Nottingham in the UK, interested in participation biases in
geospatial crowd-sourced projects such as OSM and other Volunteered
Geographical Information (VGI) projects. My current research project is
concerned with the way in which participation biases in OSM may
potentially affect the usability of the data that is collected and
subsequently what is available to location-based service providers that
use OSM as their primary geospatial database.
The project is motivated by recent research that has found a strong male
bias in OSM participation. This has led to assertions that various
geospatial knowledge could be under represented or poorly recorded on the
map. However, the actual consequences of this bias remain little explored
or reported. By collecting information about contributors to OSM, which
can then be analyzed along with their editing patterns, the impacts of
this bias might begin to be measured and therefore better understood. I
have therefore published an online survey designed to collect information
directly from OSM editors and I would like to invite as many of you as
possible to participate. The survey is anonymous and takes a couple of
minutes to complete.
If you are an OSM contributor and are interested in or would like to
participate in the study, please click on the link below, which will take
you to the Bristol Online Survey website where you will find more
information and an opportunity to participate in the survey. As a small
incentive, at the close of the survey in a few weeks' time, 60
respondents will be drawn at random to receive a £15 Amazon voucher.
To participate in the survey, click on the link below:

https://nottingham.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/osm-user-profiles
Please do think about participating. It is hoped that knowledge about the
way participation biases impact on crowd-sourced maps will enable new
strategies to be developed to address any resulting voids in the
geospatial information provided by amateur mappers. In turn this could
strengthen the role played by platforms such as OSM in urban planning and
sustainability, and could raise the profile of the important mapping work
that you all do.
In the meantime, if you would like to know more about me, my research
activities or the project, please visit my University webpage (link
below) and do not hesitate to get in touch directly or via the OSM
messaging service.

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/engineering/people/zoe.gardner
Thank you
 
Zoe
___ 
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org


https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 

Charlotte Wolter
927 18th Street Suite A
Santa Monica, California
90403
+1-310-597-4040
techl...@techlady.com
Skype: thetechlady




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

Re: [Talk-us] The Republic of Molossia (and other micro-nations)

[Jack Burke]

I would call this map vandalism and delete. 

-jack
-- 
Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology

On September 3, 2017 6:51:27 PM EDT, Bradley White  
wrote:
>Something a little bit different:
>
>The Republic of Molossia is a self-declared "micro-nation" located
>near Dayton, NV, landlocked by the United States. The nation claims
>full sovereignty from the United States; however, it is recognized by
>neither the United States, nor any other country on Earth, as an
>independent nation. You have probably heard about it before, since it
>is one of the best-known examples of such a micro-nation in the US.
>
>Within the past few months, this "nation" has popped into OSM,
>complete with sloppily implemented "admin_level=2" and
>"boundary=national" tags, view-able here:
>http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/39.32281/-119.53908. My
>discussion point is whether this is a valid use of these tags. A
>handful of quick searches about this topic didn't turn up anything for
>me, so I'm assuming no precedent has been set yet. It is worth noting
>that this is not the only micro-nation in the US.
>
>I'm not inclined to think these tags are valid. Otherwise, there's
>nothing stopping me from calling my backyard its own nation, slapping
>together a wikipedia article, and entering it into OSM as a
>full-fledged nation. However, since they are still geographically
>based entities of interest to the public, I think they are worth
>mapping
>
>There is a proposal for disputed boundaries, but I don't think that's
>valid either since there isn't really a dispute. The nation has gone
>unacknowledged by the United States, and nothing has gone through the
>legal process between the two nations (that I'm aware of) that could
>constitute a "dispute". No other boundary tag is really applicable,
>maybe a new "boundary=micronation" would work? De facto, US law still
>applies in these "micronations", along with the law of whatever
>jurisdictions the micronation belongs to, so I don't think an
>admin_level tag is applicable.
>
>___
>Talk-us mailing list
>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] The Republic of Molossia (and other micro-nations)

[Walter Nordmann]

In europe we sometimes have the same problem. deleting helps a lot ;)

-walter- aka wambacher

Am 04.09.2017 um 05:55 schrieb Jack Burke:

I would call this map vandalism and delete.

-jack



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

Re: [Talk-us] The Republic of Molossia (and other micro-nations)

[Andy Townsend]

On 03/09/2017 23:51, Bradley White wrote:

Within the past few months, this "nation" has popped into OSM,
complete with sloppily implemented "admin_level=2" and
"boundary=national" tags, view-able here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/39.32281/-119.53908. My
discussion point is whether this is a valid use of these tags. A
handful of quick searches about this topic didn't turn up anything for
me, so I'm assuming no precedent has been set yet. It is worth noting
that this is not the only micro-nation in the US.


As a "nation", I'd expect that it'd fail a verifiability test as per 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability .  It might qualify as 
a series of "tourist attractions" (which it seems that it is mostly 
mapped as now, though there is also 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7341155 ), but even that's doubtful.


I'd suggest commenting on changesets of the users concerned (the two 
most obvious ones are relatively recent mappers), saying "hello and 
welcome" and explaining what OSM is and what OSM is not.  Maybe suggest 
http://opengeofiction.net/ as a place to map completely imaginary 
places, if it looks like that's what they are interested in doing?


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Talk-us] [HOT] Surveys and studies

[Charlotte Wolter]

John,

Actually, I would have to disagree with you on that point.
Having worked in survey research, I know that each survey is
carefully constructed as to length and order of questions. A kind
kind of grouped survey, as you described, would give an experience
to respondents that would be different from the one the researcher
wanted.
I just would like to see something that told me that the
supposed research really is, for example, from Zoe at Nottingham.
Using her university email would have been advisable. At least there
would have been a good chance that it was legit.
And, maybe, requiring an institutional email is the best and
simplest way to go. That way it likely is real academic research.
Otherwise, anyone could post a survey, even someone who did not
wish OSM well, and who wished to use the "honest" opinions for
negative purposes.
Anyway, that's my take on it.

Charlotte


At 01:20 PM 9/4/2017, you wrote:



At Statistics Canada they have a concept of 
respondent burden. Basically it means you try to 
limit the number of questions you ask people 
whilst still trying to get the answers in. Is 
this information available from another survey?
May I suggest a more formal arrangement where a 
survey is organised say every three / six months 
and researchers submit their questions to be 
included in the survey? This is done for a 
number of surveys at Statistics Canada and is a 
useful way to include one or two additional / 
supplementary questions to a survey.
The advantage to the people running the studies 
is hopefully a wider set of respondents making 
their surveys more statistically valid.  The 
advantage to the mappers are fewer messages in 
the mailing lists and fewer surveys asking to be completed.
At the very least I'm sure Zoe and Laura could 
see if the data from their surveys could feed the other.
There are other things that could be done such 
as random sampling then following up with the 
randomly selected sample this reduces self selection.

Thoughts?

Thanks John
___
HOT mailing list
h...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


Charlotte Wolter
927 18th Street Suite A
Santa Monica, California
90403
+1-310-597-4040
techl...@techlady.com
Skype: thetechlady

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

Re: [Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Greg Morgan]

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:45 AM, Zoe Gardner  wrote:

> Dear OSM talk subscriber
>
>
>
> I am a Research Fellow in the Nottingham Geospatial Institute at the
> University of Nottingham in the UK, interested in participation biases in
> geospatial crowdsourced projects such as OSM and other Volunteered
> Geographical Information (VGI) projects. My current research project is
> concerned with the way in which participation biases in OSM may potentially
> affect the usability of the data that is collected and subsequently what is
> available to location based service providers which use OSM as their
> primary geospatial database.
>
>
>
> The project is motivated by recent research that has found a strong male
> bias in OSM participation. This has led to assertions that various
> geospatial knowledge could be under represented or poorly recorded on the
> map.
>

Zoe,

I believe that you need to go back to the drawing board.  OSM is not about
gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation. OSM is about people with
leisure time that are willing to spend to add nodes to a map.  If I like to
add buidlings to the map, there is nothing about those nodes and one way
that compose the building that would discriminate or leave out information
based on gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation.

This sounds like one of those surveys designed to damage OSM.
"data that is collected and subsequently what is available to location
based service providers"
That statement sound like you are performing research for a vendor that
cannot compete with OSM.

Regards,
Greg
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us