[HOT] HOT Digest, Vol 26, Issue 8

Roberto Colombo robertcolombo at gmail.com
Wed Apr 4 23:26:23 BST 2012


plese check the who-eatlas.org/Africa  and europe and emro to check sme rasters to ve used..we developed that trough the VRAM project at WHO..could this be helpfull? i might ask if this couls be added as I was engaged in the project and the methodology is public,y available..if anyone wants to replicate it I think ther would be no problem..
Risk assessments are ke for prepardness awarness and as discussed today at the U
GIS for Un meeting it's in many peoplmes mind...I advocate kfor that!
roert colombo

Enviat des de l'Ipad de l'Eva, l'Africa i en Robert.

El 04/04/2012, a les 19:43, hot-request at openstreetmap.org va escriure:
> Send HOT mailing list submissions to
>    hot at openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    hot-request at openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    hot-owner at openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of HOT digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model?
>      (Kate Chapman)
>   2. Re: Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model? (Fran Boon)
>   3. Re: Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model?
>      (Eric Lovell)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 11:18:58 -0700
> From: Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com>
> To: St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info>
> Cc: HOT at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model?
> Message-ID:
>    <CAGn7mOo0jjt2xdBGeF726JHgz8mjNs9CWYEyX1bEwMJHARoSMg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Hi St?phane,
> 
> The issue I see is more that it will depend on the type of hazard data.
> OpenStreetMap is usually used to map things that are visible on the
> ground.  I see it being difficult for some types of hazards to be collected
> by the average person (not to say for some types it isn't easier).  I'm not
> saying it is less relevant to humanitarian actors, I'm saying that it
> perhaps is better in another store and to be compared with OpenStreetMap
> data.
> 
> People combine data with OSM data all the time.  Everything isn't either an
> in or out proposition.  I think it is important to have relevant and
> updatable information in OSM and be able to utilize it with other
> information that might be less practical for us to collect.
> 
> -Kate
> 
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:35 AM, St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Kate,
>> 
>> I am browsing through inasafe website and it seems indeed pretty
>> interesting and relevant for the issues I raised in my first email.
>> 
>> However, I believe that it is complementary rather than conflicting: what
>> I would aim at is the possibility to collect hazard data in an
>> OSM-compliant format that could, in turn, be used for risk analysis, for
>> example with InaSAFE.
>> 
>> I see your point that hazard data (flood-prone areas, recurrent
>> landslides, seismic zones...) might need to be located out of the main OSM
>> DB, but I would be interested to read whether this opinion is mostly shared
>> by other HOT members? What I mean is: is the hazard data really less
>> relevant to the humanitarian and to the overall communities than the
>> blocked roads, the IDPs locations or the Search and Rescue zones? IMHO,
>> they would fall in the same category, so either everything in the main OSM
>> DB, or everything out of it. Does that sound silly?
>> 
>> Thanks a lot for replying to me, and looking forward to engage the
>> discussion with any other member that would feel interested!
>> 
>> 
>> St?phane
>> --
>> "Le mot progr?s n'aura aucun sens tant qu'il y aura des enfants
>> malheureux" -- Albert Einstein
>> 
>> "A journey does not need reasons. Before long, it proves to be reason
>> enough in itself. One thinks that one is going to make a journey, yet soon
>> it is the journey that makes or unmakes you." -- Nicolas Bouvier
>> 
>> Photos de voyages, photos de montagne: http://www.henriod.info
>> 
>> Skype: [image: Skype name: marmotte_la_gueuse]
>> Tajik mobile phone: +992 934 62 46 62
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 17:06, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello St?phane,
>>> 
>>> I don't think it would really make sense to add many of those types of
>>> hazards to OpenStreetMap.  We've collected information such as areas
>>> prone to flooding before but the actual hazard models should probably
>>> stay separate.  They can be combined with OpenStreetMap information
>>> however to create impact models.
>>> 
>>> This is something currently being done by AIFDR and GFDRR with
>>> InaSAFE: https://github.com/AIFDR/inasafe
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> -Kate
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:14 AM, St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info> wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> 
>>>> I am relatively new to OSM and completely new to Humanitarian OSM but
>>>> extremely enthusiastic about both projects and would like to contribute
>>> in a
>>>> way that I will describe below, and for which I would appreciate your
>>>> feedback and ideas.
>>>> 
>>>> Most humanitarian actors agree that the best response to an emergency is
>>>> preparedness, not only in terms of behaviors but also data. What
>>> strikes me
>>>> when I look at HOSM data model is that I don't see anything for natural
>>>> hazard delineation, for example. When responding to a crisis,
>>> humanitarian
>>>> actors might want to know in advance where to expect landslides,
>>> avalanches
>>>> and floods areas (for their own safety but also to "predict" where roads
>>>> might be blocked or where facilities might have been affected). Seismic
>>>> zonation is something that can be directly included in OSM; oldish data
>>> is
>>>> freely available from the GSHAP project, while the GlobalEarthquake
>>> Model
>>>> will provide with a more modern version in a few years.
>>>> 
>>>> My question to the active and experienced members of the community is
>>> thus
>>>> the following: would you see any relevance to develop classes for
>>> natural
>>>> (and man-made?) hazards to be included in HOSM framework?
>>>> 
>>>> As we can not expect the communities to have the technical knowledge of
>>>> hazard scientists, the ontology would have to remain quite simple,
>>> which is
>>>> probably ok for humanitarian actors (who cares whether it's a
>>> landslide, a
>>>> rockfall or a debris flow? a general category "earth mass movement"
>>> might be
>>>> sufficient for our purpose). Also, a distinction should be made between
>>>> "usual" events (those that occur relatively frequently but that might or
>>>> might not be currently triggered) and actual events (that have been
>>> actually
>>>> triggered).
>>>> 
>>>> Many challenges ahead but before diving into it, I would like to check
>>> with
>>>> you if this idea has already been discussed and if it makes sense to
>>> pursue
>>>> it.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks a lot in advance and look forward to reading your comments,
>>>> 
>>>> St?phane
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> "Le mot progr?s n'aura aucun sens tant qu'il y aura des enfants
>>> malheureux"
>>>> -- Albert Einstein
>>>> 
>>>> "A journey does not need reasons. Before long, it proves to be reason
>>> enough
>>>> in itself. One thinks that one is going to make a journey, yet soon it
>>> is
>>>> the journey that makes or unmakes you." -- Nicolas Bouvier
>>>> 
>>>> Photos de voyages, photos de montagne: http://www.henriod.info
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> HOT mailing list
>>>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>> 
>> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20120404/95ea63f3/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 19:39:34 +0100
> From: Fran Boon <francisboon at gmail.com>
> To: St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info>
> Cc: HOT at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model?
> Message-ID:
>    <CAPKzktK6ARxj7Et3+7VfAco+y7rUDGP4i7hjyyc_KaWXJccTbA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> On 4 April 2012 15:14, St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info> wrote:
>> Most humanitarian actors agree that the best response to an emergency is
>> preparedness, not only in terms of behaviors but also data. What strikes me
>> when I look at HOSM data model is that I don't see anything for natural
>> hazard delineation, for example. When responding to a crisis, humanitarian
>> actors might want to know in advance where to expect landslides, avalanches
>> and floods areas (for their own safety but also to "predict" where roads
>> might be blocked or where facilities might have been affected). Seismic
>> zonation is something that can be directly included in OSM; oldish data is
>> freely available from the GSHAP project, while the GlobalEarthquake Model
>> will provide with a more modern version in a few years.
>> My question to the active and experienced members of the community is thus
>> the following: would you see any relevance to develop classes for natural
>> (and man-made?) hazards to be included in HOSM framework?
>> As we can not expect the communities to have the technical knowledge of
>> hazard scientists, the ontology would have to remain quite simple, which is
>> probably ok for humanitarian actors (who cares whether it's a landslide, a
>> rockfall or a debris flow? a general category "earth mass movement" might be
>> sufficient for our purpose). Also, a distinction should be made between
>> "usual" events (those that occur relatively frequently but that might or
>> might not be currently triggered) and actual events (that have been actually
>> triggered).
>> Many challenges ahead but before diving into it, I would like to check with
>> you if this idea has already been discussed and if it makes sense to pursue
>> it.
> 
> Hi St?phane,
> 
> I would concur with Kate that within the OSM DB doesn't seem like the
> best place to store it, but rather a place where it can be overlaid
> with the OSM DB.
> 
> I'd be really interested to see if Sahana would make a good place to
> store this data: http://eden.sahanafoundation.org
> We don't currently include Hazard data models, but rather just overlay
> sources from elsewhere (typically WMS), but we would be very
> interested in actually having these within the Sahana database.
> I know that the Red Cross are interested in adding this to their
> Sahana deployment.
> 
> Thoughts on this approach welcomed :)
> 
> Best Wishes,
> Fran.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 11:43:01 -0700
> From: Eric Lovell <eric.j.lovell at gmail.com>
> To: Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com>
> Cc: HOT at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Including natural hazards in the HOSM data model?
> Message-ID:
>    <CANKh64NavYh-fGD=7Rj_tibAJ4DX-zFztTMjbCioHfCY2j9x-w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> By assuming that the 'average person' is unable to collect relevant hazard
> information, are we not claiming that only empirical top-down information
> should be considered? Shouldn't place-based knowledge systems be the most
> relevant systems for place-based hazards...that is "things that are on the
> ground"? Isn't this counter intuitive to initiatives to 'democratize' data?
> 
> I have no input as to whether this type of information should be
> incorporated into OSM. I think both Kate and St?phane have valid points.
> Just food for thought.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Eric
> 
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi St?phane,
>> 
>> The issue I see is more that it will depend on the type of hazard data.
>> OpenStreetMap is usually used to map things that are visible on the
>> ground.  I see it being difficult for some types of hazards to be collected
>> by the average person (not to say for some types it isn't easier).  I'm not
>> saying it is less relevant to humanitarian actors, I'm saying that it
>> perhaps is better in another store and to be compared with OpenStreetMap
>> data.
>> 
>> People combine data with OSM data all the time.  Everything isn't either
>> an in or out proposition.  I think it is important to have relevant and
>> updatable information in OSM and be able to utilize it with other
>> information that might be less practical for us to collect.
>> 
>> -Kate
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:35 AM, St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Kate,
>>> 
>>> I am browsing through inasafe website and it seems indeed pretty
>>> interesting and relevant for the issues I raised in my first email.
>>> 
>>> However, I believe that it is complementary rather than conflicting: what
>>> I would aim at is the possibility to collect hazard data in an
>>> OSM-compliant format that could, in turn, be used for risk analysis, for
>>> example with InaSAFE.
>>> 
>>> I see your point that hazard data (flood-prone areas, recurrent
>>> landslides, seismic zones...) might need to be located out of the main OSM
>>> DB, but I would be interested to read whether this opinion is mostly shared
>>> by other HOT members? What I mean is: is the hazard data really less
>>> relevant to the humanitarian and to the overall communities than the
>>> blocked roads, the IDPs locations or the Search and Rescue zones? IMHO,
>>> they would fall in the same category, so either everything in the main OSM
>>> DB, or everything out of it. Does that sound silly?
>>> 
>>> Thanks a lot for replying to me, and looking forward to engage the
>>> discussion with any other member that would feel interested!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> St?phane
>>> --
>>> "Le mot progr?s n'aura aucun sens tant qu'il y aura des enfants
>>> malheureux" -- Albert Einstein
>>> 
>>> "A journey does not need reasons. Before long, it proves to be reason
>>> enough in itself. One thinks that one is going to make a journey, yet soon
>>> it is the journey that makes or unmakes you." -- Nicolas Bouvier
>>> 
>>> Photos de voyages, photos de montagne: http://www.henriod.info
>>> 
>>> Skype: [image: Skype name: marmotte_la_gueuse]
>>> Tajik mobile phone: +992 934 62 46 62
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 17:06, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hello St?phane,
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think it would really make sense to add many of those types of
>>>> hazards to OpenStreetMap.  We've collected information such as areas
>>>> prone to flooding before but the actual hazard models should probably
>>>> stay separate.  They can be combined with OpenStreetMap information
>>>> however to create impact models.
>>>> 
>>>> This is something currently being done by AIFDR and GFDRR with
>>>> InaSAFE: https://github.com/AIFDR/inasafe
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> -Kate
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:14 AM, St?phane Henriod <s at henriod.info> wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am relatively new to OSM and completely new to Humanitarian OSM but
>>>>> extremely enthusiastic about both projects and would like to
>>>> contribute in a
>>>>> way that I will describe below, and for which I would appreciate your
>>>>> feedback and ideas.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Most humanitarian actors agree that the best response to an emergency
>>>> is
>>>>> preparedness, not only in terms of behaviors but also data. What
>>>> strikes me
>>>>> when I look at HOSM data model is that I don't see anything for natural
>>>>> hazard delineation, for example. When responding to a crisis,
>>>> humanitarian
>>>>> actors might want to know in advance where to expect landslides,
>>>> avalanches
>>>>> and floods areas (for their own safety but also to "predict" where
>>>> roads
>>>>> might be blocked or where facilities might have been affected). Seismic
>>>>> zonation is something that can be directly included in OSM; oldish
>>>> data is
>>>>> freely available from the GSHAP project, while the GlobalEarthquake
>>>> Model
>>>>> will provide with a more modern version in a few years.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My question to the active and experienced members of the community is
>>>> thus
>>>>> the following: would you see any relevance to develop classes for
>>>> natural
>>>>> (and man-made?) hazards to be included in HOSM framework?
>>>>> 
>>>>> As we can not expect the communities to have the technical knowledge of
>>>>> hazard scientists, the ontology would have to remain quite simple,
>>>> which is
>>>>> probably ok for humanitarian actors (who cares whether it's a
>>>> landslide, a
>>>>> rockfall or a debris flow? a general category "earth mass movement"
>>>> might be
>>>>> sufficient for our purpose). Also, a distinction should be made between
>>>>> "usual" events (those that occur relatively frequently but that might
>>>> or
>>>>> might not be currently triggered) and actual events (that have been
>>>> actually
>>>>> triggered).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Many challenges ahead but before diving into it, I would like to check
>>>> with
>>>>> you if this idea has already been discussed and if it makes sense to
>>>> pursue
>>>>> it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks a lot in advance and look forward to reading your comments,
>>>>> 
>>>>> St?phane
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> "Le mot progr?s n'aura aucun sens tant qu'il y aura des enfants
>>>> malheureux"
>>>>> -- Albert Einstein
>>>>> 
>>>>> "A journey does not need reasons. Before long, it proves to be reason
>>>> enough
>>>>> in itself. One thinks that one is going to make a journey, yet soon it
>>>> is
>>>>> the journey that makes or unmakes you." -- Nicolas Bouvier
>>>>> 
>>>>> Photos de voyages, photos de montagne: http://www.henriod.info
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> HOT mailing list
>>>>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>> 
>> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20120404/f17757b9/attachment.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> 
> 
> End of HOT Digest, Vol 26, Issue 8
> **********************************



More information about the HOT mailing list