[Imports] Sabbioneta buildings import
musuruan at gmail.com
Mon Feb 5 17:15:52 UTC 2018
I always find your e-mails in the spam folder because the "message has
a from address in yahoo.it but has failed yahoo.it's required tests for
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Giorgio Limonta <giorgio.limonta at yahoo.it>
> Hi Andrea thank you for your feedbacks
> > I think you're rushing this import. You sent the email on talk-it just
> 4 days >ago. You should allow more time to reviewers to examine your
> Yes you right but I have send my first mail about this import to the
> talk-it in october the 17th.
You didn't provide any documentation at that time. It was just a single
mail about a possible import. You then disappeared for about 3 and a half
> In add you have to consider that this import is not very complex in term
> of number of features and complexity of the process, but off course I'll be
> waiting the ok of the OSM community first.
I do believe it's not a complex import but the review process is performed
to find possible issues and avoid later troubles with bad imported data
(and I already found out some problems with your translated data). There is
no need to rush :-)
> >Your proposal miss some of the parts detailed in the >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Plan_Outline. I really suggest
> you >to use it as a template and fill the different sections.
> I try to fill all the sections that could be explain well the import
The "About & Goals" chapter you use past tenses but most of the actions
still have to happen.
The "Schedule" chapter is missing.
"Import Type" section in "Import Data" chapter is missing. You should
likely say your import is a one-time import, you won't use automated
scripts, all the tags will be entered manually and data will be imported in
the OSM database using JOSM.
> >There is no link to the original data set.
> The original dataset is not an online source, but I add this information
> in the proposal.
You should upload the original dataset.
>In the licence section, please add the the Municipality of Sabbioneta has
> agreed to license the data under the ODbL. Do not suppose non Italian
> speakers can read the waiver.
> You perfectly right, I hope now it's clear.
"Data license" should link to a text copy of the ODbL.
"Type of license" should be "ODbL".
> >Tagging the changeset with "source=Carta Tecnica Comunale" is not good
> enough. It does not link the data to your import. It >would be better to
> tag it like the following:
> >source=Comune di Sabbioneta
> >The source tag is mandatory. I strongly encourage to use the other ones
> Could be good "source=Comune di Sabbioneta - Carta Tecnica Comunale"?
It's fine for me, but please note that you have entered an unwanted space
in the wiki (source= Comune di Sabbioneta - Carta Tecnica Comunale).
> About the other tags I gonna add all if you think it's the right way to do
> but I wonder: Why remark that the license is ODbl? Isn''t implied?
As I said, I strongly encourage to use them.
Source data license is not implied. Different data sources can be
distributed under different licenses.
> >The resulting OSM file has a lot of duplicate nodes and nodes of adjacent
> buildings not connected. You can check them using JOSM >validator.
> >In multi-polygons, there are some tags that are probably a leftover from
> the original dataset: OBJECTID, Entity.
> I fixed them, I hope it's all right now.
I noticed that logging in is required to download the data. This is not
very friendly towards people without a gmail account. Can you please remove
The data still have some issue:
- adjacent buildings that are not connected
- a building has self-intersecting ways
- churches are tagged with "denominati" (it should be denomination)
- bell towers are tagged with man_made=campanile (shouldn't it be
man_made=tower + tower:type=bell_tower?) and without the building tag. See
- some buildings are split in different parts (still tagged as
building=*) and you assign different heights to them. I'm not an expert
about this but it seems this is not the right procedure. Please read
>The conflation phase is missing. How do you plan to conflate existing
> buildings and imported ones?
> >The revert plan is missing.
> >The QA phase is missing.
> >I guess you are the only one that will perform this import. Please state
> it in the "Team Approach" section along with your your >current OSM
> username (GiorgioL) and import username (GiorgioL-import).
> I hope that I have added all the requested informations.
I have some troubles with your conflation phase which is summarized as
"Merge the tag and the history of the existing features through the JOSM
Utilsplugin2 plugin;". It's not clear, at least to me, how Utilsplugin2 is
helpful in this context. I suppose (because you didn't write it) you'll use
the "Copy tags from previous selection (Shift+R)" feature. BTW, isn't it
simpler and less error prone to use the "More Tools -> Replace geometry"
The revert plan is fine.
QA phase is still missing. Do you plan to use some kind of validator (e.g..
JOSM validator)? When? Do you plan to do some kind of post import
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Imports