[OSM-talk-be] Address stats in Belgium

[Glenn Plas]

On 04/15/2013 02:38 PM, JorenDC wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In December there was a thread (start: 
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/2012-December/003367.html) 
> containing some numbers/stats.
>
> @Sander, *: is it possible to share your used method to pull these 
> stats (or just pull them again) and publish them on a 'frequent' base 
> (I'm not saying weekly, but what about +/- every 4 moths or so)? In 
> that way we can see a bit of our progress regarding this 'project'.
The method (overpass query) is mentioned in that link thread (Jo points 
it out).  On the subject..... I've been mapping a lot of housenumbers 
lately, verifying my data against AGIV data before committing to OSM...  
I can only conclude there is much work to be done,   AGIV is far from 
recent concerning new built houses, and OSM itself has lots of issues 
regarding accuracy.

I'm not too sure on the scientific significance of such a statistic 
either.   I would more than love to see stats that compair quality of 
the entered addresses.  (completeness , including postal code and other 
addr:* tags, number of corrections etc. )   I've been correcting a lot 
of mistakes and I start seeing a negative tendancy in it:

The ones that have done a LOT of input but didn't care to quality check 
(validating even!) what they entered.   I'll state this:  I'm cleaning 
up far too much crap others leave behind, I'm far from perfect in my 
housenumbering too in this small village it's still a huge undertaking, 
especially on complex corners where some numbers of the same building 
belong to a different street.  I have houses I've changed 3 times in a 
row after visiting.

Moreover, I see some people tagging the next city name on a street, 
probably because they think it's in the next city, but OSM shouldn't be 
a guessing game or a race to enter the most addresses if that info is wrong.

If someone has such an overpass query, I'm more than interested to see 
those results, the rest looks like bragging rights.

The AGIV site is valuable , even though it's slow.  It's great tool to 
verify what city a certain street belongs to.  for example : 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.998941&lon=4.426396&zoom=18&layers=M

De "Kleine Parijsstraat" belongs to Zemst, not Mechelen.  If you look 
this up in nominatim, it will tell you it's in Mechelen, which is 
totally wrong.   You will not find this street using AGIV in Mechelen.  
But someone decided this was Hombeek(Mechelen) instead. So the borders 
of Zemst where wrong as well as this was used to determine these.    The 
street above that "Boterstraat" can be found in Mechelen, not in Zemst.  
Thanks to AGIV, I'm more certain when those cases present. ( You can 
still see the old cached tile in some zoom levels)

But then again, I saw AGIV containing WRONG housenumbers too. 
Verification in the field (twice) confirmed that what I had in mind was 
matching reality.   So it's like a triple check: a) know the place b) 
visit it c) check with AGIV d) map a decent hous e) be complete, using 
the plugins to add Country/postal code/streetname to an address node so 
the data is easily searchable later.

I really, really have to plea to everyone to enter _better_ data than 
more ...., just instead of looking at the sheer number of address 
info/nodes entered.  It's quickly getting tired when I have to keep 
cleaning up behind the top providers.

I'll get off the soapbox now.

Glenn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20130415/4e5bbaa0/attachment.htm>