[Imports] Building outlines/footprints in Strzelce-Drezdenko county

Jason Remillard remillard.jason at gmail.com
Sat Dec 14 05:48:28 UTC 2013


Hi,

>From the file, here are the actual tags+values.

building:fireproof=no
building:fireproof=yes

- Could you make a wiki page for this tag. It is used 90,000+ times.
It seems to be just from already started import?

building:levels=1

- OK

building=fixme
building=greenhouse
building=ruin
building=support
building=yes

- building=support, is not in the wiki. I don't have any idea what
this means. Should this be roof?

description:pl=Budynek w ruinie
description:pl=Cieplarnia, szklarnia

Does "Cieplarnia, szklarnia" mean greenhouse? If yes, it is redundant
with the building=greenhouse tag.
Does "Budynek w ruinie" mean ruins? If yes, it is redundant with the
historic=ruins tag.

building:type:pl=Obrys budynku nieognioodpornego
building:type:pl=Podpora (słup nośny) podcienia, wiaty, galerii
building:type:pl=Przyziemie budynku nieognioodpornego
building:type:pl=Przyziemie budynku ognioodpornego

- should this be a note?
- Does "Podpora (słup nośny) podcienia, wiaty, galerii" mean support?
Is it redundant with the building=support/roof?
- Does "Przyziemie budynku ognioodpornego", fireproof? Is it redundant
with building:fireproff=yes?

historic=ruins

- OK

source=Starostwo Powiatowe Strzelce Krajeńskie, raster
source=Starostwo Powiatowe Strzelce Krajeńskie, survey

- For imports, I think that we have a consensus that the source tag on
objects is not needed and it is preferable to put it on the change set
(just for imports).

I still need to look at the script.

thanks
Jason



On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:56 PM, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14 December 2013 00:57, Jason Remillard <remillard.jason at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Andrzej,
>>
>> Some quick feedback.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>> First off on process.
>>
>> - We need to see all of this info pushed into an import wiki project page.
>
> Ok, will add it once confirmed.
>
>> - We would like to see some OSM files you have not uploaded yet for review.
>
> http://openstreetmap.pl/balrog/starekurowo.osm.bz2 is the data for the
> remaining municipality.  Not conflated because I'd later need to redo
> it to avoid conflicts with new edits.
>
>>
>> On the tagging
>>
>> - You have the source tag on the changeset, you don't need it on the
>> buildings. If you want to see the different between survey/raster,
>> break them up into different change sets.
>
> Well I've heard arguments for both ways, but the local consensus is
> towards having the source= tags on objects.  Also the fact that you'd
> have to split your edits between sources instead of grouping logically
> according to your mapping habits makes me think they belong on the
> objects (although obviously the value only applies to those edits,
> where the source= tag changes its value)
>
>> - I would also kill the building:type:pl tag, and try to translate it
>> into one of the established building= values.
>>
>> Just import them as building=<something>.
>
> I'm already using building= values if I can derive them from that
> info, but the original data doesn't have actual information on the
> building's use except if it's a greenhouse, a ruin, a foundation, etc.
>  The other tag may tell you whether a given shape is the outline or
> the footprint, sometimes other bits not captured by building=*.
>
>>
>> Lastly, could you add a description *what* address merge script does,
>> perhaps into a header in the file.
>
> Added a description in
> https://github.com/balrog-kun/ewmapa2osm/blob/master/shape-utils/merge-building-addrs.py,
> good point.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Jason
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:38 AM, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was asked to help with the import of cadastral data for a few
>>> municipalities in the Strzelce-Drezdenko county in Poland.  Here are
>>> some details of this import, which is partly done already, but I'm
>>> going to wait with further upload.
>>>
>>> Technical:
>>>
>>> The data is in shapefile format which looks like a direct conversion
>>> of the data internally (I belive) kept as a DXF by the antique
>>> software GIS offices use, which means it's basically a vector drawing
>>> rather than a geospatial database.  I believe SQ9NIT, the user who
>>> imported the two initial municipalities, used grassgis tools to
>>> convert the wall segments into closed shapes and sanitize them, and
>>> added the following tags:
>>>
>>> building=yes
>>> source=Starostwo Powiatowe Strzelce Krajeńskie
>>>
>>> I have used the set of python scripts at
>>> https://github.com/balrog-kun/ewmapa2osm to produce OSM data, which
>>> relied on the line type attribute to set proper tags based on some
>>> manuals published by the company who I believe made the original
>>> software used by county geodesy service.  Specific tags are documented
>>> in the python code, but basically it's building=* and
>>> building:type:pl=*.  I used two source= values:
>>>
>>> Starostwo Powiatowe Strzelce Krajeńskie, survey
>>> Starostwo Powiatowe Strzelce Krajeńskie, raster
>>>
>>> depending on whether the original data indicates a given outline was
>>> surveyed.  Building height and usage information is unfortunately not
>>> in the shapefiles I got for that particular county, must have been
>>> filtered out.  I have already imported data for three of the
>>> municipalities using the account balrog-kun-imports with one chunk
>>> mistakenly uploaded from my normal account.  Conflation with existing
>>> building data was manual, most of which data was authored by the same
>>> user who asked for help with the import.  Conflation with existing
>>> address nodes was done using the python scripts at
>>> https://github.com/balrog-kun/osm-addr-tools.  There's one
>>> municipality that is almost completely traced from imagery which I'm
>>> not going to work on, possibly except buildings that are automatically
>>> deterined to not intersect with any existing buildings.  There's data
>>> for one more municipality that I'd like to import.  It contains 4000
>>> closed shapes.
>>>
>>> I have simplified the shapes (similarly to JOSM's simplify-way tool)
>>> but I imagine the density of nodes may still worry some of you.  I
>>> believe it is similar to the French cadastre.  You can look at some of
>>> the data around http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/250886166.  Let me
>>> know if you find any issues with the data.
>>>
>>> Background and legal:
>>>
>>> The fire service in various parts of Poland has much success talking
>>> to local administration about providing data for use in OpenStreetMap.
>>>  In the Strzelce-Drezdenko county user daroKPPSP from the local
>>> brigade obtained building outlines data (in some cases footprints) for
>>> the eight municipalities of that county, specifically for use in OSM.
>>> A long time mapper and also a fire fighter SQ9NIT imported two of
>>> these municipalities some time ago.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Imports mailing list
>>> Imports at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports



More information about the Imports mailing list