[HOT] CAR Activation; experienced mappers to finish the import of UNICEF data?

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Fri Jan 3 19:27:16 UTC 2014


> From: Severin MENARD [mailto:severin.menard at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2013 3:22 PM
> To: Paul Norman
> Subject: Re: [HOT] CAR Activation; experienced mappers to finish the
import of UNICEF data?
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> 1. Health Facilities 
> 
> The fixme for longitude,latitude was proposed from the first version, 
> dated April 5. 

The general view is that fixme tags should not be mechanically created, 
and tags should not duplicate geodata. Similarily, tags like lat and 
long do not belong. 

> Differences I see are:
> * source:UNICEF,2012 is tagged per object. Wold be really interesting to 
>   have such a tag as a minimum of metadata, but I know that, IMHO 
>   unfortunately, the trend is to put a source tag to the changeset (good 
>   idea, but of course only if everything in the changeset comes from the 
>   same source) and remove any source tag per object (very regretful for 
>   the metadata by object; means almost any OSM data extract another 
>   formats will not have any source for the data) 

If you want to change the import to include source tags, that needs to 
be discussed.

> * typo identified by edvac with _ intead of : . Super easy to change and 
>   to correct from the data already imported. Just one question: such 
>   correction on data already on OSM should be done with a OSM import 
>   account or a normal one?

If you're thinking of the addr:city tag, I'd do it with the same account 
used for the import.

> 2. Education facilities and Water facilities
> 
> The fixme for longitude,latitude was proposed from the first version, 
> dated April 5. 

> Differences I see are:
> 
> * admin level 1, 2, 3 informed by UNICEF for each object were not 
>   present in the proposition. Actually the first imports showed they are 
>   really interesting for quality check. Is this OK to put them? What 
>   should be the right key? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Admin_level 
>   does not mention a tag for admin level names. 

These changes are ones you need to propose and discuss. I'd say that 
this information belongs on the appropriate boundary relations, not 
on what you're importing.

> 3. Otherwise, regarding edvac_import "lacking changeset tags as 
> described in the consultation", after having checked his 6 changesets 
> (see here), I see this problem only once. What is the fix for this? 
> Revert te changeset and do the upload again with the changeset tags? 

Heh, it figures that that's the one I looked at in more detail. Given it's 
just one, I'd say to leave it.




More information about the HOT mailing list