http://svimik.com/verbatiumimportmap1.png Here's the screenshot. Not precise, but gives some idea. 40903 buildings is a bit too much for JOSM.
Вторник, 24 сентября 2019, 22:08 +03:00 от "Jaak Laineste" <j...@nutiteq.com>: > > These txt reports with IDs are not too visual, can you create any renderable > file for josm (.osm for example) or screenshot to show the community what it > really means? Are the building under question random or somehow in specific > areas etc. I dont know if there is any "test osm server” for such experiments > nowadays somewhere, probably not. > > Jaak > > > On 24 Sep 2019, at 07:50, SviMik <svi...@mail.ru> wrote: > > > > I have analyzed the largest verbatium's import (changesets 591093, 579407, > 572107, 569277, 569055 (ways) + 561094, 559707, 558636, 558056, 557568, > 557358, 557193, 556899 (nodes only)), which was made in 2008. That covers > 86.7% of all his edits. > > The import was covering Tallinn, Saue and Maardu. Turned out verbatium > wasn't particulary active outside Harjumaa. > > There were total 67813 ways imported, 9032 of them are already deleted by > other editors, and 17878 were changed either in geometry or tags* department > (15529 has a geometry change, and 5077 has a tag change), which leaves 40903 > buildings for deletion. > > * I did not count the following tags because they are part of my imports > anyway: addr:city, addr:country, addr:housenumber, addr:street, maaamet:ETAK, > maaamet:orig_tunnus, source, source:addr, addr2:* > > * If some change was reverted I do not count it as a change, because I only > compare the first and the last version > > > > Here is the list of ways for deletion: > > http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways_unchanged1.txt > > > > Here is the full report for all the 67813 ways: > > http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways1.csv > > > > Full list of his changesets: > > http://svimik.com/verbatium_changesets.xls > > > > Currently, the bbox of his changesets has 91324 buildings, which means... > We're gonna delete 44.79% of Saue-Tallinn-Maardu buildings. That gonna be > interesting. Should we split it by 10k for example? Or just start with Maardu > and see what happens? > > > > > > Воскресенье, 15 сентября 2019, 9:42 +03:00 от "Jaak Laineste" > <j...@nutiteq.com>: > >> Hoi, > >> > >> Jah, need peaks kustutama. Enne võiks teha muudatuse analüüsi - kui palju > ja > >> kus kustutataks, ega mõned linnad kohe väga tühjaks ei jää. > >> > >> Jaak > >> > >> p.s. sama asi ka corine impordi osade tag-idega, näiteks põllud (field), > need > >> on pigem müra kui info kaardil. > >> > >> > >> > >>> On 14 Sep 2019, at 15:34, SviMik via Talk-ee <talk-ee@openstreetmap.org> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi everyone! > >>> > >>> I'd like to discuss the import made by verbatium in 2008: > >>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/569055 > >>> (...and other similar changesets) > >>> > >>> There are two issues with that import: > >>> 1. Unknown data source with unknown license (probably it was a Garmin map > >> judging by the Type=0x13 tag) > >>> 2. Poor quality of the data. If you see a building distorted like this: > >> http://svimik.com/verbatiumimport1.png > >>> - you can be sure it's verbatium's. Maybe it was OK in 2008, but in 2019 > we > >> have much better options. > >>> > >>> What can be done: > >>> 1. Remove all buildings which geometry and tags were not edited since the > >> initial import. For the tags the following exceptions can be made because > they > >> were automatic edits: > >>> - User xybot has fixed the tag typo (buildung=yes) in the initial import > and > >> added its own tag (created_by=xybot) > >>> - User juhanjuku has removed the Type=0x13 and created_by=xybot tags > >>> - User SviMik_import has imported the address tags to these buildings from > >> the Maa-amet database (nothing that can't be imported again) > >>> 2. Proceed with the Maa-amet building import as usual > >>> > >>> It will solve: > >>> 1. The license issue (if there is any) > >>> 2. The quality issue (if you agree there is an issue) > >>> 3. Will update the map in general, for example the demolished buildings > will > >> be removed from OSM. > >>> > >>> For buildings which geometry was changed by other contributors after the > >> initial import - we can assume both license and quality issues were solved > >> since they no longer contain the imported geometry. I know it's a grey > field, > >> and I'm not sure it works like that, but at least these buildings do have > some > >> excuse to stay. > >>> > >>> For buildings which geometry was NOT changed, but some POI tags were added > - > >> let them stay for now and discuss it later if needed. I suspect it will be > a > >> rare case, but the exact number is unknown right now. > >>> > >>> Questions: > >>> 1. Has anyone else digged into the issue, maybe asked verbatium himself? > >>> 2. Can anyone confirm that the import indeed has the license problem? > >>> 3. Is the proposed plan good? (in case if you agree that it needs to be > >> fixed) > >>> > >>> -- > >>> SviMik > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Talk-ee mailing list > >>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org > >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ Talk-ee mailing list Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
