On 2018-09-21 13:33, Lionel Giard wrote:
I'm not supporting the addition of this WMS neither, as it is more imprecise than others sources for most of the data. So the question about the license is not really important in that case. The regional sources for buildings, parcels, streets,... are almost always with a better precision.
What you're not supporting is using that WMS I suppose but you don't say exactly for what.
The text I prepare also very highly discourages roughly using what is bearing Cadastre coordinates, but encourages such things as discovering finding missing house numbers or locality names.
So, regarding "the addition", my opinion is "yes" as long as the user is informed of the above.
But, unfortunately, [J]OSM did not think of displaying such usage notes to the user discovering JOSM, installing it, fumbling and GO.

The pity is that this downloadable Opendata is made of local files that are very inconvenient to use with an editor like JOSM.
Please, keep the WMS going !!!
It would be much better if shapes were on a server similar to WMS but vector.
And in fact, an idea would be to put it in a second OSM2 server.
The shape data would be converted to OSM2, as imprecise as it may be, but maybe with heuristic tags.
Then the user would evaluate if the position is correct, copy OSM2->OSM and shift it to the right location.
The Cadastre polygons usually have a good shape (thanks goodness) but are often in the wrong location.
That is just a last resort alternative way of doing.
Using AreaSelect to map houses including numbers is more straightforward and preferred for buildings.

In fact, I strongly suggested that any OSM editor displayed the terms in the server metadata the first time the server is used, whenever they change and periodically. JOSM strongly refuses to do that.
They refuse to display that a server strongly forbids using its data and they act as if that they could be able to list all of the allowed servers of the 89291 ones.
And the very partial JOSM database should be repeated for every OSM editor.
Think of Merkaartor. They've had a configuration for PICC from the start.
Users start Merkaartor and they see PICC without warning. Maybe they think they launched a jigsaw puzzle game !!!
And no vigilante ever complained.  And [J]OSM says it's the way of doing.
Not very logical to me who was accused of what I never did !!!
One important thing that the cadastre give, is the administrative boundary as it is the authorithy on this subject (to keep the cohesion with parcels and administrative boundaries) as explained here https://data.gov.be/fr/dataset/b47f2ffd-ebc9-413c-903f-d83af520fcdb (you can choose the language at the top left of the page) :
"The General Administration of Patrimonial Documentation of the FPS Finances was designated by the other institutes as being the authentic source for this database and manages it as such" -> this is the layer "B_CaPa" in the downloadable data. So this would be the useful part of the cadastre, But i don't think we need the wms for that, if we want to improve the administrative boundary, we can just download the layer and use it as a base, to re-position the boundaries.
I'm speaking of boundaries in my document too :-(
And especially of the once sought old municipalities.
They have traditionally been different from other sources.
But if they're official...
The characteristic I've noticed is that they avoid crossing parcels.
So, watch who's selling their estates to keep them moving ;-)
It's very convenient to display a WMS layer displaying only boundaries.

All the best,

André.


Le ven. 21 sept. 2018 à 12:49, joost schouppe <[email protected]> a écrit :
Hi,

André asked to include the WMS of this service by default in the JOSM repository. A long conversation ensued. Some of the confusion is caused by the fact that the WMS probably contains outdated license info. I have now asked the FOD Finances for a second time to clarify this. The ticket was closed, which is probably a good thing, as it is probably not a good idea to show this data by default in JOSM anyway!

But even for the license of the downloadable files the JOSM team seemed a bit worried: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/16693#comment:7
When I read the license, I felt attribution requierement in the license was defined loosely enough that mentioning it under Contributors would be enough. It would be nice to hear from other people how they interpret this license.

Op vr 24 aug. 2018 om 13:58 schreef joost schouppe <[email protected]>:
Hi,

The cadastral plan is now open data for the entire country!

That's pretty big because:
- for Wallonia, it's the first open vector data with parcels, buildings, roads and road names.
- contains "underground buildings" which were not available anywhere AFAIK.
- there's a dataset with roads that have some kind of "erfdienstbaarheid"/"servitude". This might be of use for certain dubious paths

But of course, please note:
- there is way more data where this came from - the attributes of the parcel are not included (like building levels, number of units, landuse)
- Belgian cadastre data has a bad reputation in general so do not trust everything you see. The building geometry seems to be quite poor, especially when it comes to exact positioning, not so much the shape itself.
- do not trust road name data (it doesn't follow the CRAB name, so not official in Flanders). Names are often abbreviated
- the roads do not form a network, there are duplicate geometries and some geometries are outdated by half a century
- there is pretty good metadata included. However, you might find data that does not follow the explained model

The license file is included in any download. It seems to be compatible with OSM, but it would be nice if more people give it a good read. The first one to use it for mapping, does need to add it to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors

The data is in shapefile format (boooo!), but Philippe Duchesne has made a download site where you can get it in geopackage format. There is also a "view" link. To actually see the data there, find the big switches to activate the layers you want to see. The bigger ones take a while to load!

More details:
* Official website:

* Metadata:

* Repackaged into an open data format:

We think this data will only be usable for validation efforts. If you think an import could be useful for some of the data in some places, do not forget to follow the Import Guidelines or risk having your work reverted.

Happy mapping,
--
Joost Schouppe


--
Joost Schouppe
_______________________________________________
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



_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Reply via email to