[Talk-ca] canvec / shp-to-osm
steggink at steggink.org
Sun Oct 25 22:15:27 GMT 2009
I think to know what is going on. I've tried to convert the residential
areas of 031I08 myself, and I got an OSM file with an outer polygon.
However, the outer polygon has no tags. Also, it looks that Sam's batch
files run shp-to-osm with the -t parameter, which suppresses the output
of features without any tags.
* shp-to-osm needs to be adjusted, so that the outer polygon will get
the tags, but the inner polygons will not.
* shp-to-osm should be called without the -t parameter.
Is this possible?
Frank Steggink wrote:
> Hi Sam,
> I've just downloaded some CanVec data, and had a look at sheets 031I07
> and -08. I wonder what you mean by uploading all "sub-residential
> files". I understand that the data is separated over multiple files,
> because of certain limitations. In the residential OSM files I also see
> no polygons with a multipolygon relationship of "outer". So,this means
> that the outlines of places like Trois-Rivieres and others are missing.
> The same issue is going on with wooded areas. The data is converted with
> Canvec2OSM version 0.9.4.
> I had a closer look at the raster file (from Toporama) of sheet 031I08,
> because there is much less data, and I looked at the village of Gentilly
> (see ). This is in the center of the sheet. The raster file suggests
> that a multipolygon relationship should be in place, but the vector file
> (BS_1370009_2_Residential_area0.osm) shows only the two inner polygons.
> Are the outer polygons stored in a different file, or are they not
> converted at all? The shape of the outer polygon doesn't look to be
> complex, so I don't think the max_nodes threshold would be exceeded.
> Looking at the OSM file: there is only one multipolygon relationship in
> it, but it only refers to the two inner polygons, and not to any outer
> polygon at all.
> One note regarding multipolygons: the inner polygons shouldn't have any
> tags at all. See .
> Anyways, some clarifications about what is going on, and how the data
> should be interpreted would be welcome. I'm reluctant to import data
> which looks not correct. For the rest, keep up your good work :)
>  http://osm.org/go/cKHX9ApT-
>  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon
> Sam Vekemans wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>> i think your refering to the large multi-polygons such as
>> 'residential_area', and it 'appears' to be inverted.
>> Here's the majic; when all the sub- residential.osm files are uploaded
>> to OSM, it renders correctly.
>> In JOSM, you need to zoom out and load the area, to see it.
>> I think i'll load a region of NFLD in the next cuple days to test my hypothises.
>> ps. I cc'd talk-ca as this was mentioned b4.
>> On 9/22/09, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com> wrote:
>>> Dear gentlemen,
>>> I've had a look at some of Sam's test areas. In 1435 files there are
>>> zero occurrences of Relation=outer.
>>> So at some point we started calling relation=outer, relation=inner or
>>> completely dropping outer relations by mistake.
>>> I do still see rare nested ways, but both are marked as inner, and are
>>> on separate layers after --maxnodes
>>> I've run 0.6.1 again with an old rules file and see the same problem
>>> so I believe that this is an issue in shp-to-osm.
>>> Ian can you check a 0.5.0 - generated file and see if it contains any
>>> Best regards,
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Talk-ca