Hi Marc, On 25-01-16 17:05, Marc Gemis wrote: > A short question about source:geometry.
Feel free to ask > > Should I/we keep it when we modify the building afterwards. I'm > thinking of the following cases When I modified a building manually because GRB is not correct, I change this to source:geometry=AGIV This way it would be a very simple/lightweight Overpass query to see the manually adjusted buildings. This could even serve as a feedback to GRB itself, as I hate finding errors and mistakes in GRB with no (easy and fast) way to reporting this. It's also easy to extend this, source *could* be Bing (although I hope to never see that in the data), it could be a future source, but any adjustment made, I would strongly recommend changing that value. It could probably be 'Survey' in your case ;-) The most common error is when only the front side has been measured and the visible sides (aka , what you can see from standing in the street) > * In the meantime, part of the building got destroyed > * The building got finished in the meantime > * straighten the corners > * connecting 2 building parts because the part above the > "tunnel=building_passage" is missing building passages are actually in the GRB-Gis dataset, often, but not always it's a 'verdieping' or 'roof'. I've seen both with a lot more verdieping's than roofs for building passages. > * splitting a building because the garage is clearly separated on AGIV imagery You should not have to do that imho, I've never encountered this 'too much building in between' situation. When the garage is separated visibly on sat images but not in GRB, that's a precarious case, it could be that the building has been replaced but GRB isn't up to date, it could also be that the sat pics used are out of date and there has been an additional construction already in GRB. You can't tell now what is correct from combining al sources of information. If you want to be complete on buildings, you have to combine at least 3 shape files: Gbg = main buildings and buildings (OSM types: sheds, garages, house, churches, hangars, office and so on ...) Adp = roofs, verdieping (in essence a building), difference between roof attached(overhang on building) and separate (a free standing gas station roof) Knw = So far what I've seen, none of these buildings have a housenumber/address/street attached. Most often, these buildings are separated from the rest , but I've seen some that attached to other buildings. Knw is the hardest to turn into OSM with a script in fact, I still need to implement this. But the amount of buildings in here is small and none are sporting an address in the datasets I analysed, I find these less important at this moment. But combined, they should match the building you see well. Make sure you compare your building with at least the combined Gbg+Adp GRB version. But 'too much building'-case in between , I only encountered this when buildings were obviously destroyed. Resulting in deleting in entirely. Do you have an OIDN (and area) of this building? I can take a look at the data set to understand better. Glenn See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/GRB > > > regards > > m > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
