[Imports] [Cat2Osm2] Tool for exporting Spanish Cadastre data in OSM suitable format

[Paul Norman]

> From: Cruz Enrique Borges Hernandez [mailto:cruz.borges at deusto.es]
> Subject: Re: [Imports] [Cat2Osm2] Tool for exporting Spanish Cadastre
> data in OSM suitable format
> 
> > Well, it's not possible to review them without also looking at the
> > cadastre data. For example, how could I verify that what is in that
> > table as "Jardín que se valora" should really be tagged as
> > leisure=garden? It's impossible to do so without looking at the data
> from the catastro.
> 
> Unfortunately, the raw shapefiles for catastro cannot be redistributed
> without modifications (the modified can be) and you need a valid
> electronic spanish ID card to access them but you can access pseudo-
> vectorial data (a rasterization of the data contained in the shapefiles)
> through JOSM.

This license issue is concerning. Are you saying that if someone downloads
the data, converts it to .osm and doesn't do modifications that result can't
be distributed? Can't you just get the .osm file that you would end up
uploading? After all, if there was no OSM data in the area you'd presumably
not alter most of the file.

> Just download any portion of data from Spanish and JOSM will suggest
> using it. We have made that and  LOTS of test with our own towns (and
> several mappers form the Spanish community have made the same) to
> interpret correctly most of the Documentation. Moreover, we have been
> using the data from Ciudad Real for a Engineering Project form almost a
> year so we have a relative good experience with both sets of tags.

I looked at the WMS but it doesn't allow me to tell what the tagging is.

> We completely agree with you. Moreover, we have made that and more. BUT,
> and this is and important BUT, we know (because we have talked with
> persons close to the cadestre service and because we have see it LOTS of
> times) that the internal consistence of their tagging is scarce. We
> mean, every civil servant have their own set of "tagging rules" that do
> not completely match one with others. Only in big cities seems to be
> some sort of "standardization".
> So in the end, we have needed to reach a "tagging consensus" between
> several zones in order to do not fit the tags to only one civil servant
> "rules". We have made test in several towns of the Canarian Islands,
> Cantabria, Ciudad Real (the entire province, in this case), Segovia, and
> several other (by the local
> community) and we think that we have reach a good consensus. Probably,
> as other mappers start using it, some degree of "tagging tuning" should
> be made in order to reach a bigger consensus.

It sounds from this (the making tests) like you have done what I was talking
about, which addresses my concerns.