Anyone got any more comments about this import and the points raised below?
We (the DWG) got a complaint about it at the time (and there were a lot
of "not in my name" comments on this list and on IRC), but there don't
seem to have been any further comments since 27th April.
Best Regards,
Andy
On 27/04/2017 20:26, Brian Prangle wrote:
Apart from some posts about the problems with email notifications of
changeset discussions, there has been nothing to indicate where I take
this import. I guess that's because the initative is really down to me.
I've annotated Harry's Import wiki page
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Birmingham_City_Council_trees_data>
with some comments and ideas. I've copied below what I think are the
relevant bits from the wiki page and I look forward to resolving the
issues as I'm keen to complete the import.
Extract from wiki page:
So update approach is to be planned. /*This is not a requirement
currently listed in the wiki imports guidelines. However it is good
practice and the issue was raised with Amey and Birmingham City
Council as soon as the data was released. Don't expect quick results!*/
*Import user problems*: The import so far has been entirely uploaded
by the brianboru <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/brianboru> user
account. The size of the import was such that it should have been
carried out by specially created OpenStreetMap user account. This
guideline is in order to create another mechanism of
separating/disentangling these edits from normal mapping
/*Solution: dedicated import account created: brianboruimport
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/brianboruimport>*/
*Tag problems* :
Example imported tree
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4721553869
natural <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural>=tree
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree>
source <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source>=bcc_dec_2016
form
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:form&action=edit&redlink=1>=Natural
age
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:age&action=edit&redlink=1>=New
Planting
height <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height>=2 to 2.99m
species
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:species>=Liquidambar
styraciflua 'Worpl
usrn
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:usrn&action=edit&redlink=1>=2701986
plot_number
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:plot_number&action=edit&redlink=1>=110007
site_name
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:site_name&action=edit&redlink=1>=LUDGATE
HILL
ward
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:ward&action=edit&redlink=1>=Ladywood
constituency
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:constituency&action=edit&redlink=1>=City
Centre
* Areas: ward, and constituency tags describe the /area/ a tree is
in. That is not a normal thing to do with tags on many nodes. A
lot of data which ordinarily should be determined by a data user
(if they require it) by geo-querying boundaries information. These
tags will have a data update problems when the political
boundaries change /*The local community decided some years ago not
to add political boundaries, so there is currenty no other way of
querying the tree data by this attribute. This will need
revisiting once the boundary changes are in effect*/
* 'site_name' key which contains the street name written in all
capitals. Did this need importing, and if so, did it have to be in
capitals? /*Enables the average joe/jane to query data by street
name. Is the use of capitals a problem apart from being ugly?
Maybe searches are case-sensitive? The downoaded dateset used for
import has been edited so that this field is "Properly Cased" so
any new imports won't be affected. Can also bulk edit existing
imported data*/
* 'usrn' appears to be an identifier (Unique Street Reference Number
<https://data.gov.uk/dataset/national-address-gazetteer>). The
purpose for this should be documented. Perhaps local_ref or
ref:usrn should have been used. /*usrn is indeed Unique Street
Reference No. Its purpose is documented in the link and is a
national standard for referencing streets.*/
* 'height' values are formatted in a non-standard way (See
Key:height <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height>) /*Is
this a problem? Not everything is recorded to a standard. If there
is insistence on a standard then it can be fixed e.g by tagging
the existing data as height:range and tagging with height =x where
x= the nearest whole number at the upper end of the range*/
* species but no genus /*????? See example above which uses normal
binomial name of genus and species (and includes in this case a
cultivar)*/
Regards
Brian
On 14 April 2017 at 17:24, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 13/04/2017 20:26, ael wrote:
....And none of the 3 suggested causes applies in my case.
What was the problem in your case?
Best Regards,
Andy
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
