Thanks for your help Jo, On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi eMerzh, > > I'm sorry, you ended up on the todo / procrastrination pile. > No problems ;-) > I looked at your files and you have the building shapes converted > already... great! I'd like to learn how you did it. > I'm not a qgis expert so it may not be the best/easiest way but : i've open the .shp files as a vector layer, then i did a count of address in the building polygons (Vector > analysis > pt in polygone) then i save all building with 1 addresses in anither shape file , then i did a datamanagement tools > join by location to put address attributes in the building. Then saved the shape as a WGS84 and i opened it in josm ... a few attribute renaming and i saved it in .osm.. and voilà :d > > I would have added associatedStreet relations to the osm files as well. mmm yeah ... unfortunately i don't see how i can do that Combine addr:street:fr and addr:street:nl in addr:street or omit it/them > altogether. > yes i know that usually we only have addr:street but as in BXL we (don't know who :p ) decided to set the street name as it come from the mapper (fr-nl or nl -fr ) it's really hard to discover... if i don't set it we will not have the relation to the street anymore :s If somebody knows a better solution? > Since most buildings are houses, I'd use building=house. > mmmh do not really agree on this one ... for me building = yes is more generic ... if we know it's house then ok let's change it, but let's not put house everywhere and make the value "house" equivalent to "yes" > Lots of houses were already drawn in Brussels. Do you plan to > integrate/reusing the existing nodes? Or simply replace what was already > there, making sure the shops and amenities get transfered properly? > > Jo > > Again on this one, i think it will be really hard to merge the nodes of existing houses... and to see what's already beneath is not easy either .. Most (all?) of the building in BXL are traced with bing which is really inaccurate (at least all the building i did are like this : etterbeek, ixelles, ..) and i'm in favor of a ***carefull*** !! remove and replace with merging of amenity, ... the integration will be slow but ... what are you thinking? any one else on this topic? let's discuss it here before someone start by himself without discussing it here. > > 2013/5/11 eMerzh <merz...@gmail.com> > >> Hi everyone :) >> >> i take some times to look more in the data of urbis, >> i also played with qgis to try to extract some informations... >> i started with buildings and addresses as i think it's the weakest point >> in brussels... >> >> So here is my take on etterbeek (as it's a small one): >> >> I split it in 3 files : >> - buildings without addresses >> - building with 1 address (address on the building shape) >> - building with more than 1 address (address as diffrent points) >> >> What do you guys think? >> >> >> before uploading there is still some work to do : >> - check for duplicated node or self intersecting buildings >> - check for existing buildings / address in osm >> >> Any comments? >> >> >> http://my.bmaron.net/public.php?service=files&t=c73bc235b68982c874d6e29f9223a741 >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:31 AM, eMerzh <merz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi , >>> Thanks for you researches Jo... i'm currently reading the user guide >>> given upper, and it may helps you to understand what's what :p >>> >>> yesterday Cquest from osm-fr gave me his extract of addresses so it must >>> be possible some way ... (see here >>> http://my.bmaron.net/public.php?service=files&t=7264154f5a483352ebe0846fdeeeabbb) >>> >>> For the integration ... as it seems that the datas are far better than >>> what's already in osm ( a lot of buildings where drawn by hand on top of >>> bing ....) >>> and addresses are far from complete ... >>> my opinion is that we may try to first "integrate" buildings then >>> address (address seems to be easier i think it's better if we could link >>> them to the building). >>> Another place where an import will be hard but we can still do smth is >>> roads names. >>> >>> Then of course there is a lot of other things we can start thinking ... >>> like pharmacy , ... >>> >>> Btw, >>> how do we manage the attribution ? a text in the wiki pointing to URBIS? >>> a source=* on every object ? or a source=* on the changeset? >>> >>> >>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:27 AM, eMerzh <merz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi , >>>> Thanks for you researches Jo... i'm currently reading the user guide >>>> given upper, and it may helps you to understand what's what :p >>>> >>>> yesterday Cquest from osm-fr gave me his extract of addresses so it >>>> must be possible some way ... (see in attach) >>>> >>>> For the integration ... as it seems that the datas are far better than >>>> what's already in osm ( a lot of buildings where drawn by hand on top of >>>> bing ....) >>>> and addresses are far from complete ... >>>> my opinion is that we may try to first "integrate" buildings then >>>> address (address seems to be easier i think it's better if we could link >>>> them to the building). >>>> Another place where an import will be hard but we can still do smth is >>>> roads names. >>>> >>>> Then of course there is a lot of other things we can start thinking ... >>>> like pharmacy , ... >>>> >>>> Btw, >>>> how do we manage the attribution ? a text in the wiki pointing to >>>> URBIS? a source=* on every object ? or a source=* on the changeset? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi eMerzh, >>>>> >>>>> The data is provided in different ways. I started by looking at the >>>>> topology files, but everything is totally fragmented in there and I can't >>>>> seem to find the glue to tie it all together once again. One would have to >>>>> 'reconstruct' the front, sides and backside of the houses and combine with >>>>> house numbers. >>>>> >>>>> The adm files seem to be more accessible. PostGIS has a plugin which >>>>> enables to import dbf and shp files. So from the Urbis site we would >>>>> download the data in SHP format. >>>>> >>>>> Unzip and then point Postgis to the DBF files. Don't forget to change >>>>> the character encoding to LATIN1 (or set it to that for the whole DB, but >>>>> then it needs to be converted to UTF-8 later on). >>>>> >>>>> Once it's all imported, start QGIS and connect to the DB. Now it's >>>>> possible to visualise the data. >>>>> >>>>> Urbadm-bu contains the buildings. >>>>> >>>>> What we should decide is what do we want to use for import/integration? >>>>> >>>>> Many of the buildings in Brussels are already drawn. Are we going to >>>>> replace them with this data? Does replacing mean: throw away the nodes and >>>>> start over, or do we try to keep the nodes and "simply" change their >>>>> positions? (Not so simple to code, but probably not impossible). >>>>> >>>>> What is probably simple is to create an OSM-file with all the >>>>> housenumbers. Then it's still a lot of manual labour to put them in and >>>>> verify with what we already had. >>>>> >>>>> Creating OSM files with all the building outlines would be a bit >>>>> harder to accomplish. I've been trying to decipher how the data is >>>>> organised in the tables for the past few hours... >>>>> >>>>> I can't seem to find the link between the buildings and the >>>>> housenumbers/streets, but maybe I should have a fresh look at it, once the >>>>> headache goes away... I do think it's in there somewhere. >>>>> >>>>> Jo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Talk-be mailing list >>>>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
