[Imports] Merced buildings and addresses import

Nathan Mixter nmixter at gmail.com
Sat Oct 25 17:00:29 UTC 2014

Hi, I have already conflated the new data with the existing pois and
buildings, keeping tags that were already added like the gnis tags on
churches and keeping existing buildings rather than the new ones. I still
need to manually check some of the other existing pois to make sure there
are no dups with the ones being imported. Where I couldn't verify the
existing poi location of the building already in the database, I added the
fixme tags so I can survey it later on and see if it can be found or
deleted if it is not there any more. The n tag was just a mistake. It looks
like it should be name instead. I will fix these tags. Thanks,

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Jason Remillard <remillard.jason at gmail.com>

> Hi Nathan,
> I loaded the data in JOSM. It has some weird tags for an import.
> Fixme, n, fixme, gnis:* ,
> It looks like this data has been merged with the existing OSM data,
> otherwise why have gnis tags?
> Some of the buildings that are in OSM overlap with the data. It is all
> kind of confusing
> Jason
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 2:13 AM, Nathan Mixter <nmixter at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Merced County Association of Governments has building footprints,
> addresses
> > and other digital files that can be imported into OSM. GIS Analyst
> Natalia
> > Austin was very helpful in quickly answering questions and confirmed that
> > the files are public domain and can be freely used. The county has both
> > addresses and building footprint files available. They may update the
> data
> > in the future, but the county only does it as it has time and doesn't
> have a
> > specific time schedule, so this will probably be a one-time import,
> although
> > it may be worth checking back in the next couple years to see if they
> have
> > made any major updates in either of the files. The import will include
> > information merged and conflated into one file.
> >
> > I have downloaded with Turbo API the few buildings already in the county
> and
> > have verified that none overlap with existing buildings. I left the
> existing
> > buildings in place as much as possible and merged any existing  address
> > nodes or pois manually with the new buildings. Unfortunately not every
> > building in the county was digitalized, but most address points were.
> Where
> > there was a direct one-to-one relation, I merged the address point with
> the
> > building outline. When more than one point occupy a building, the nodes
> were
> > kept separate from the building outline. I added 100s of buildings
> manually
> > from imagery so blocks would have the missing outlines rather than just
> the
> > address node.
> >
> > The original shapefiles included the name and type of business. The extra
> > category allowed them to be matched to their corresponding OSM tags. Both
> > name and OSM category have been included when possible, and the original
> > tags were deleted. The shapefile created unnecessary relations with
> several
> > of the buildings near each other. These have been manually removed as
> much
> > as possible, leaving just the tags. I have gone through and tried to make
> > sure the addresses that are not conflated with the buildings are as
> close to
> > the building as possible and there are no overlapping address points or
> > extra floating address points that don't correspond to anything. I
> expanded
> > the street abbreviations and converted to proper case items that were in
> all
> > caps.
> >
> > The JOSM file is available for review at
> >
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/byclptdmlevy1p8/Merced%20buildings%20and%20addresses.osm?dl=0
> .
> > See more on the import wiki page at
> >
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/Merced_County_Buildings
> > .
> >
> > Please let me know with any thoughts, questions or concerns.
> > Thanks,
> > Nathan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imports mailing list
> > Imports at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20141025/32bb6813/attachment.html>

More information about the Imports mailing list