[Imports] Norwegian place name registry (SSR)

Karl Ove Hufthammer karl at huftis.org
Fri Jul 12 19:26:44 UTC 2013


fr. den 12. 07. 2013 klokka 10.05 (+0200) skreiv Martin Koppenhoefer:
>         - Names will be conflated with existing elements where
>         possible, overwriting existing names with the official and
>         registered alternate spellings
>

> IMHO you shouldn't overwrite in OSM existing names without local
> knowledge. Better add the SSR-names as "official_name" in case of
> incongruences.

All the objects/names will semi-manually imported. That is, each and
every imported object will be added as a new node or merged with an
existing node or area by a human being. This will preferably be done 
by a person with (at least some) local knowledge, and who can use
her/his judgement when deciding how to handle the names.

> -1, "name" in OSM is usually the name as local people use it and not
> the name how it is "accepted" according to an official entity. Have
> you discussed this issue with the local community and is there
> consensus to accept SSR as the one and only instance for "correct"
> Norwegian names?

Note that Norway may differ from other countries in that we have a
detailed and strict ‘law of place names’, where each place name have one
(or in some cases several) names. These are the *only* legal names for
the objects, and is used on all maps, on road signs &c. (Of course both
signs and maps may be outdated, or have accidental misspellings.)

There is a complicated procedure for getting a name into the official
place name database, starting at the local municipality level, and
involving experts in toponomy before final approval.

Because of this, we see the names from the official place name database
as *the* correct names, which should therefore be used in the ‘name’ and
‘alt_name’ tags.

Other local variants can and should be listed in the loc_name, old_name,
short_name, … tags.
  
>         source:name=Sentralt stadnamnregister, Kartverket 
>         
>         no-kartverket-ssr:url=http://url-to-factsheet
>         
>         no-kartverket-ssr:objid=12345
>         
>         no-kartverket-ssr:date=2012-06-08

> this metadata really should go on the changeset and not be tagged on
> object level, at least source, no-kartverket-ssr:url and
> no-kartverket-ssr:date

Except for ‘source:name’, this metadata is integral to each object, and
is needed for keeping OSM in synch with the place name database. The
‘objid’ is needed for matching OSM objects with the place name database,
so that we are able to remove, add or change objects whenever the place
name database is updated.

Note that the date is *not* the date of the import, but the date of the
last change for that object in the place name database. Whenever this
changes in the place name database, the OSM object will usually need
updating. We will maintain a list of all OSM objects that need
updating/maintenance, based on the ‘objid’ + ‘date’ information.

The URL is not strictly needed, but is *very* convenient for people
editing the database, for learning the source of the correct
name/spelling and other details on the object. Otherwise the
names or even the existence of the object may be confusing.

‘source:name’ can be put on the changeset, but isn’t it customary
to include source information directly in OSM?

-- 
Karl Ove Hufthammer
http://huftis.org/
Jabber: karl at huftis.org




More information about the Imports mailing list