Great! These 4 tags seem to be the prefered choice by everyone. :) canvec:UUID=12364j4o* attribution=Natural Resources Canada source=CanVec_Import_2009 created_by=canvec2osm
I'll like to also recommend keeping a 5th tag 'canvec:CODE', this will give users the method of sourcing the data within the wiki, as well as on the source PDF. As its useful and has significant value. IMO -to get all the other tags, when relevant for their own projects. It would enable a method for searching within osm for all the same taged features, without 'bogging' down the OSM database. Let me know, Cheers, Sam Vekemans Across Canada Trails On 6/25/09, James Ewen <[email protected]> wrote: > I'll second, third, and fourth that motion if I can... There's far too > much useless and redundant data contained in the tags. The information > that is available in Canvec is of value to the project, but if you're > going to put hundreds of thousands of redundant tags into the > database, you're going to make it difficult for people to make use of > the data available, simply because of bloat. > > If you feel the need to recreate this data somewhere other than in the > source PDFs, go ahead and make a wiki page. If it makes you happy, > create a seperate wiki page for each node and way that you would be > importing, listing all the pertinent information for each entity. That > should keep you busy for a couple decades. If you can see the folly in > creating thousands of wiki pages containing nearly identical > information, then you should understand why it would be foolish to > include such information attached to each entry in the OSM database. > > James > VE6SRV > > > On 6/25/09, Sam Vekemans <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thanks Richard :) >> do we have a 2ndr for that motion? >> >> Happy to hear u were able to run the script. As you say, it didnt work >> right. The next version will be packaged to include all the different >> rules.txt files needed. (perhaps it should be called pre-beta) im >> surprised it actually worked :-) Sorry for your wasted time running >> the BETA script. (but its appreciated) >> >> Maybe others can comment or +1, on ideas u noted? >> >> I think we all agree that before importing all of Canada, we want to >> be as close to 100% certain as possable. Although its possable to >> revert and mass-change, getting it 'best' we can 1st time through is >> 'best'. >> >> Great ideas, thanks for all the imput and great detail. >> >> Do we prefer if the extra details get made into wiki pages for each >> feature? Rather than leave users to check the .pdf. >> Id prefer the wiki because the charts are sortable and more easy to >> read than the pdf. -im asking now, in hopes to save me work. (it took >> a week to add in all the canvec details to the script & chart) which >> is 100% accurate. And yes, the CanVec pdf has spelling errors (and >> redundency & inconsistancy that could be fixed). >> >> Cheers, >> Sam >> >> >> On 6/25/09, Richard Weait <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 22:56 -0700, Sam Vekemans wrote: >>> >>> [ ... a lot of stuff ... ] >>> >>>> Anyway, i uploaded a couple sample features to Port Renfrew, BC >>>> >>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/163132 >>>> >>>> >>>> What tags should be removed??... but more importantly, WHY.. >>> >>> Hi Sam (and list), >>> >>> Others have suggested that you are including too much from canvec in the >>> import. I agree. Much of what you are importing can be dropped without >>> hurting OSM. >>> >>> These should stay. >>> >>> created_by = canvec2osm >>> landuse = residential >>> source = CanVec_Import_2009 >>> attribution = Natural Resources Canada >>> canvec:UUID = 11CF43A8C213E5F4E0409C8467120387 >>> >>> Sam, you say on the canvec2osm page[1] that v0.74 is the latest >>> canvec2osm zip file. Some older versions are found at your site[2] but >>> not v0.74 or several others. It also looks like you have started >>> uploading sample area .osm files with similar names to the script.zip >>> files. Confusing! >>> >>> I think most of what you are putting into the sample[3] should be >>> removed and can be safely removed. Here's what I've done: >>> >>> I've run the canvec2osm V0.22 script for a large portion of southern >>> Ontario. This created over 1,300 files. >>> >>> Then I looked for unique data in each of the tags. For example I found >>> that in over 1300 files "canvec:PROVIDER" had only five values and two >>> were duplicates. >>> >>> canvec:PROVIDER = Federal >>> canvec:PROVIDER = federal >>> canvec:PROVIDER = municipal >>> canvec:PROVIDER = Provincial/territorial >>> canvec:PROVIDER = provincial_territorial >>> >>> This adds almost zero value to OpenStreetMap and it would be damaging to >>> OSM to include this data in every item imported from CanVec. I can't >>> imagine that a large number of OSM users would care if data came from >>> the town, province or federal government for each node and way. >>> >>> These should stay. They are appropriate and useful to OSM users and >>> tools. >>> >>> created_by = canvec2osm >>> landuse = residential >>> source = CanVec_Import_2009 >>> attribution = Natural Resources Canada >>> type = multipolygon >>> >>> These should be removed. The tags above tell those interested that the >>> data came from CanVec. If they need to know more, they can find their >>> way through the wiki and svn. Lots of duplication here. >>> >>> canvec:CODE = 1370012 >>> canvec:datasetName = 092C09 >>> canvec:generic_code = 1370009 >>> canvec:min_size:CODE = 1370009 >>> canvec:source = CanVec_Feature_Catalogue_Edition_1_0_2.pdf >>> canvec:entity = Residential area - ( Zone résidentielle ) >>> canvec:value = Residential area - ( Zone résidentielle ) >>> canvec:Theme = BS Buildings and structures >>> >>> No canvec:source, just "no". This tag appears over 385,000 times in my >>> sample area. The value is always >>> "CanVec_Feature_Catalogue_Edition_1_0_2.pdf" No way. Put it in the >>> wiki. The only folks likely to care are the ones who are working on the >>> import. >>> >>> Next was >>> canvec:Planimetric Accuracy (CMAS) >>> >>> First, "canvec:Planimetric Accuracy (CMAS)" as a key is broken. Keys >>> must not include spaces. Second, I think it should be dropped from the >>> import even if the key is fixed. >>> >>> In over 1300 files the only values for this key were: >>> >>> -1,0,3,5,10,21 and 30. >>> >>> Not much to choose here. And not much to learn from adding this tag to >>> every node and way. I say drop it entirely OR use k=canvec:accuracy, >>> v=value and only include it for the worst of the data, like values >=21 >>> meters. That would add value for OSM users by making it obvious that an >>> item could possibly be improved by a consumer-grade GPS with a good fix. >>> >From my sample only 45 objects out of ~400,000 have these poor accuracy >>> values. >>> >>> Or, alternately, drop any data with accuracy >=21 meters and don;t >>> include it in OSM. >>> >>> canvec:VALDATE is similar. Best would be only to include valdate when >>> valdate is older than ten years, as something that an OSM mapper could >>> reasonably bring up-to-date. Or just don't import anything older than >>> ten years old. But I say drop VALDATE entirely, but I'm willing to be >>> convinced otherwise. >>> >>> And what is this stuff? Details on how they classified the data when >>> they collected it? And did CanVec really misspell "tolerance" twice? >>> This is not adding value in the OSM database. Leave it in the wiki or >>> let people track it down in the canvec documents if it is important to >>> them. >>> >>> Drop all of these: >>> canvec:min_size:area_sq_meter = 1000 >>> canvec:min_size:lat_distance_meter = 1.5 >>> canvec:min_size:length_meter = --- >>> canvec:min_size:long_distance_meter = 3 >>> canvec:min_size:right_angle_tollerance_degree = --- >>> canvec:min_size:spike_angle_tollerance_degree = 10 >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Richard >>> >>> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canvec2osm >>> [2] http://www.acrosscanadatrails.com/Home/ >>> [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/163132 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-ca mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >>> >> >> >> -- >> Twitter: @Acrosscanada >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-ca mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >> > -- Twitter: @Acrosscanada Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
