On 8 June 2011 14:18, Ed Avis <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve Doerr <doerr.stephen@...> writes: > >>I wonder if the good folks at ITO could devise a way to analyse the >>not:name tags in the database and see whether any of them are now >>redundant? In other words, are the OS correcting any of the mistakes we >>appear to have identified? > > It would be cool to see a comparison the other way round: testing the OS data > for accuracy using OSM as a reference. In inner London I think there are > about > 5% of names missing from OS - mostly semi-private drives or estates, but > nonetheless signposted and addressable - so I think they would score no higher > than 95%. > > (OS Street View is a bit better, I'd say that only about 2% of roads that > exist > are missing from it, and the 'false positive rate' of Street View showing a > road > where nothing is on the ground is almost nil. It's not as easy to do > automated > comparisons however. These numbers are totally off the top of my head and > apply > to London only.)
I do agree that it may now be interesting to include two new columns: 1) A list of not:names that orginated from OS Locator but where OS Locator does not currently contain that error. The challenge is that not all not:name entries in OSM will have originated from error in OS Locator; they could contain details of errors from other sources, such as Navteq or TeleAtlas or elsewhere. The practical approach may be to just publish the differences and not worry about the original source but include text from the not:name:note field which can provide any supporting information about where the error came from (such as "duff data in TeleAtlas Oct10", or "OS Locator June10"). 2) A list of street names which are in OSM but which are not in OS Locator could be a good publicity tool for OSM and a good new source of errors for elements of a way (for example where a short section of a street associated with a bridge but the other way had a typo in OSM). I guess that needs would ideally have its own rendering layer? We might start with just a list on district page with no rendering and we come back to rendering at a later point. If others wished to create rendering now then that would be great! Finally. Might it be useful for us to accommodate have multiple not:name entries associated with a single road? For example where a single street has multiple different duff names from one or more different sources, ie OS Locator and Navteq both have different wrong names. Should we accommodate 'not:name_xxx' where xxx can be any text? Regards, Peter > > -- > Ed Avis <[email protected]> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
