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

Severin MENARD severin.menard at gmail.com
Wed Dec 25 23:21:56 UTC 2013

Hi Paul,

On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com> wrote:

> > From: Severin MENARD [mailto:severin.menard at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, December 23, 2013 6:52 AM
> > Subject: [HOT] CAR Activation; experienced mappers to finish the import
> of
> UNICEF data?
> >
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2590517305
> >
> > I had a look at this and there are a number of tags which are not in the
> > Proposal which was consulted on with imports at .
> >
> > Please hold off doing any more of these imports until these issues get
> > Resolved, or the changes are consulted on.
> > What are these tags? Only the three admin levels? I figured out they
> > were in the data (We were three people to process the data along the
> > workflow and seems we missed this) and actually not in what had been
> > described in the wikipage so I added it a few days ago in the wikipage,
> > thinking it was not a big deal. The key may be improved though, what do
> > you think? Otherwise, I also added what had been considered by us from
> > the beginning after discussion with UNICEF.
> The issue is that what was done was not what was proposed.
> http://www.osm.org/user_blocks/425
> lists a couple of the issues. This list is not necessarily exhaustive.
> There is also the issue of the fixme, as a new issue that was missed
> during the consultation before.
OK let us be constructive and go forward. I will list all the issues I can
identify. Please add others if you see more, because I guess to be able to
import again, the issues will have necessarily to be solved exhaustively.

1. Health Facilities<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import_CAR_UNICEF_FOSA>

The fixme for longitude,latitude was proposed from the first version, dated
April 5.

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)
* 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

2. Education facilities<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import_CAR_UNICEF_Education>
 and Water facilities<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import_CAR_UNICEF_WASH>

The fixme for longitude,latitude was proposed from the first version, dated
April 5.

Differences I see are:
* fields "not tagged because not relevant" have been added recently just
for info. I guess this cannot be an issue as they are not imported
* 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.
* source tag (see above for Health facilities)

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



> > This issue reminds me we asked the Import WG where we should publish the
> > original data so that it could be available for anyone to check during
> > the validation process, but we did not get an answer.
> There is not currently an Import WG. You can find a list of working groups
> at http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Groups

I meant the import list.

> > Is there an official repository? Ideally, it would be one run by the
> > OSMF, so that we are sure the original data would be always available.
> I don't think anyone has proposed adding hosting third-party geodata to
> what the sysadmins manage. I'd be a bit skeptical about adding that to
> their jobs, but such a discussion is wider than just this import and
> wouldn't be resolved immediately.
So let us start such a discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20131226/fbcb3634/attachment.html>

More information about the Imports mailing list