If I understood correctly every single street name of the Netherlands is already in Wikidata.
2017-11-23 14:31 GMT+01:00 joost schouppe <[email protected]>: > Jo, > Does Urbis hold the same authority about the correct street name as CRAB > does in Flanders? I've understood there might not be a single authoritaive > list for Brussels, but I'm not sure. > Do you have an idea on how it would actually work on this scale with > Wikidata? Do you know of some projects that use Wikidata on that scale? I'm > asking because I think Agentschap Informatie Vlaanderen might be really > interested in linking their data to Wikidata, and from there to OSM. It > helps that it allows for a single datamodel for any country that uses > street names. And thus for one single QA tool to keep street names valid > anywhere that model is used. > > 2017-11-22 22:11 GMT+01:00 Jo <[email protected]>: > >> Urbis released all the data for the Brussels region several years ago, so >> it should be possible to use that data like we use CRAB in Flanders. >> >> My personal preference would be to work with wikidata identifiers for >> every street in and around Brussels. >> >> Polyglot >> >> 2017-11-22 21:09 GMT+01:00 joost schouppe <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hi Nadia, >>> >>> Nice to see you here! >>> >>> I've played with the idea of unique identifiers for OSM objects myself >>> before. But it remains controversial in the international community (not so >>> much in Belgium). Here's an article I wrote long long time ago about it. >>> It's especially useful for the comments, which outline some of the problems >>> with my idea [1]. >>> Also relevant to get a feel for the issues is when this proposition for >>> a global reviews database was discussed. Possibilities for linking were >>> investigated, and adding external IDs got quite a bit of headwind. >>> >>> There has been a discussion about wikidata recently that turned so big >>> that I couldn't follow at all. But at least until recently, there seemed to >>> be an openness towards adding wikidata unique IDs. I don't know enough >>> about it to have a real opinion, but to me it sounds elegant to translate >>> an official source of streetnames into wikidata objects, then adding that >>> identifier to OSM. Maybe those more versed in Wikidata can explain. >>> >>> That said, I'm not sure your proposed solution is the most simple >>> solution to the problem. Given that streetnames are given by the >>> government, in theory there is one and only possible way of writing the >>> name. In Flanders, that would be the CRAB name. In the very few cases where >>> CRAB is still wrong (or more to the point: the sign in the street says >>> something slightly different than what CRAB says), you could have >>> name="Name on the Street Sign" and something like name_official="Name in >>> CRAB". In that situation, the problem is different: how do make sure all >>> the street names are and stay correct in OSM. By coincidence, we are >>> actually working towards doing something like that. In the scope of the >>> Road Completion project [1] we want to start "attribute/tag comparison" >>> real soon. Glenn as well has built something that is even further along the >>> line of being in production, where we look for "close to this official >>> road, there is no OSM road with the same exact name". >>> Similar bit different, we developed a website last Open Summer of Code, >>> where official cycling network data is compared to OSM data all the time. >>> That way we can make sure our Brussel cycling network is always at least as >>> correct as the official data. >>> It's only a few more steps (not easy ones, I know) until we can work >>> this out further. Any difference in street names should then be fixed quite >>> quickly. I'd rather see you guys helping out in this effort, than starting >>> a cumbersome import. >>> >>> As far as I know, those codes are only open data in Flanders >>> (accidentally through CRAB open data). One of the few rules about "what to >>> map" is that it should be verifiable (preferable by anyone, in the field). >>> There are a few exceptions, but they are rather rare. As long as the >>> National Registry codes are not open data, that sounds lie a real problem >>> to me. In fact, there is no way you can import data into OSM that is not >>> open. Because then we would have to re-license OSM with the license of the >>> National Registry :) >>> >>> One more thing is that using this ID will give you false certainty. You >>> will get your results, most of the time. But someone might have corrected a >>> segment (it used to have the name A, but it really is street B), and they >>> will not know what to do with this strange ref number. So even after a >>> succesful import, you would still need something like the constant >>> comparison described above to check if the streetname is still what the >>> unique identifier assumes it should be. >>> >>> Ben and I have also spent a lot of time thinking about this problem in >>> general terms: "how do you keep external data synchronized to OSM". In the >>> case of roads it shouldn't actually be that hard. Say you start of with a >>> table joining the two datasets together based on the object IDs. You then >>> need to monitor how both datasets evolve. On the OSM side, you only have to >>> keep analysing segments that have changed a lot (say, the average >>> coordinate is too far away; the total length changed too much) or have >>> disappeared. Then you can have a process that finds if an object that is >>> similar enough is still mapped in the same place. Only when a certain >>> threshold is reached, there's a need for manual intervention to check what >>> is going on. >>> While this sounds complicated, I do think someone experienced in the >>> field, could build a model in a couple of days. I think the end result >>> would actually be more dependable than your idea, and probably less work to >>> implement. I've built something solving a similar problem in FME in not too >>> much time (a professional FME worker then re-built it in two days). Seppe >>> suggested that in the case of road data, a tool like OpenLR [5] might >>> actually already solve this problem. And Glenn seems to think this is quite >>> straightforward using Postgis. >>> >>> Just out of curiosity: what kind of information do you have that is >>> valid at the level of a streetname? >>> >>> >>> >>> 1: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/diary/34328 >>> 2: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-August/0 >>> 76498.html >>> 3: http://www.osm.be/2017/01/06/en-project-road-completion.html >>> 4: https://cyclenetworks.osm.be/brumob/ >>> 5: http://www.openlr.info/ >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-be mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-be mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >> >> > > > -- > Joost Schouppe > OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> | > Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup > <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
