https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Roads if you need to contact some Wikidatians on adding roads.
m. On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > 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/076498.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 | Twitter | LinkedIn | Meetup > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
