[OSM-talk-be] TEC & Open Data: let's start !
André Pirard
A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
Mon Jun 16 21:13:37 UTC 2014
On 2014-06-16 01:58, Jo wrote :
> Hi,
>
> The conversion is done. Municipality names are converted to lower
> case, restoring the accents. Route_ref is calculated.
Many thanks Jo!
A few remarks.
As there were as usual no replies on this list to my remarks about
missing bus line numbers and accent-less uppercased place names, I wrote
to the TEC myself. They recognized my remarks as valid points and they
said that they will fix these problems, but no sooner than September.
I'll cc: you.
I wonder if it wouldn't be wiser to "let's start !" in September with
that data rather than do it twice.
Whatever I try, I see accent-less uppercased place names in your file.
I thought that you had found the line numbers, but I don't see them.
My file was displaying the lines (without number). Yours not. Here is
an additional layer to display them.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/ty49nmfdb2vfz4m/TEC_2014_04-Lignes.2.osm.bz2
> All that's missing at the moment is comparison with existing data
> already present in OSM. I'm already doing that for the stops of De
> Lijn, so the process exists. It merely needs to be adapted a bit in
> the scripts I created.
>
> I'm not adding source on the objects anymore. Instead I add source
> tags on the changeset as a whole.
On one hand, using a source= tag is highly recommended in the bus stops
and lines, if not required.
On the other, you must of course be able to tell data that was added by
copying the elements of your file from OSM.org data that existed before
your publication and that must be updated.
It's not a matter of how *you* make updates and tag change-sets, but of
how *the mappers* will do it.
They'll File>Upload those updates the normal way, without your
change-sets tags, I don't know how to do it.
If you use *source=survey 2014-06 TEC 2014-04* in bus stops as I
recommend, you will both comply with the source requirement and be sure
to find the indication that they contain your file's data and can be
deleted from the remaining-to-be-updated file.
If an existing element does not contain *source=survey 2014-06** TEC
2014-04* or later, it will be kept in the remaining-to-be-updated file.
If a mapper further updates the data, he is kindly requested to use a
new date such as *source=survey 2014-07* or *source=survey 2014-06-21* .
> As for the operator, I prefer to use simply TEC.
No problem for me with *operator*, but (Sorry Julien, fourth time) if
you use *network*=tec-wl.be that's not an URL and that is not clickable
here <http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/857875464> although we agreed
using an URL (*network*=http://tec-wl.be which is clickable here
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1645537259>) then please add
website=http://tec-wl.be.
The OSM file with all the stops in Wallonia can be found here:
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/42418402/TEC.osm.zip
I think you should say that it must not be used for updates right now.
> What we still need to discuss:
The topics mentioned above and
> Is it OK to keep the zones as 4 digits? For me it's better, as it
> makes them unique. It's not what can be read at the stops in the
> streets though (There you'll find the last 2 digits).
I find the 4 digits all-right because if you don't want to see the first
two you just close your left eye but if they weren't there and if you
wanted to see them it wouldn't be possible ;-)
What do the left two digits mean? Wouldn't that be the place for the
line number? Following "be.wa."?
Cheers,
André.
>
> Polyglot
>
>
> 2014-06-16 1:38 GMT+02:00 André Pirard <A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
> <mailto:A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com>>:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm conducting an offline TEC conversation business with Jo and
> I'm impressed.
> You will soon be able to confidently buy TEC tickets and use the
> OSM transport map ;-)
>
> I have just two tag remarks.
>
> For the third time (Julien), if we want to use URLs, we'd better
> use URLs.
> network=tec-wl.be <http://tec-wl.be> is not an URL as you can see
> by not being able to click on it here
> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/857875464>.
> network=http://tec-wl.be is one as you can see by being able to
> click on it here <http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1645537259>.
>
> I recommend adding *source=survey 2014-06 TEC 2014-04*
> Much like Key:source
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source> indicates and I am
> presently proposing to amend slightly as shown below.
>
> The bulk import scenario was clearly written with in mind the idea
> to maintain a remaining-to do TEC file.
>
> Suppose an *.osm file is built from an imported source. The map
> contributors are requested to move/update the map elements to
> osm.org <http://osm.org> after verifications such as coordinates.
> If the *.osm map elements contain a survey value such as
> source=survey <import-date>, then a program can find out by
> checking for an equal or later survey date what map elements have
> been moved/updated to osm.org <http://osm.org> and hence build a
> remaining.osm file containing what remains to be done. A FIXME
> can be added at import time to already existing osm.org
> <http://osm.org> elements to warn about the ongoing import.
>
> Cheers,
>
> André.
>
>
>> Following this discussion here is a proposed clarification to
>> Key:source <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source>.
>> The goal is to define the word, make date mandatory, use ISO
>> format, define per source tag meaning.
>> Is there any objection or suggestion for changes?
>>
>> *survey* yyyy-mm[-dd] (with one blank and an /ISO/ 8601
>> <http://www.google.be/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iso.org%2Fiso%2Ffr%2Fhome%2Fstandards%2Fiso8601.htm&ei=X3qZU_CEPNHR4QT34YGwCg&usg=AFQjCNHMm5_cA8CzTjEvrWYQc5GZ9K1wLg&sig2=m6xdSXuaBGqt6Qlj0tCfTw&bvm=bv.68911936,d.bGE>
>> format date) can be used within the data of any source.KEY=* or
>> source=* tag to indicate that, on that date, the source(s) of KEY
>> were the most recent and the data was verified to be correct for
>> that KEY. In source=*, survey means the same for all possible
>> (required) keys (even those absent by default), but it can be
>> overridden by survey in some source.KEY tags. survey helps to
>> avoid making already done verifications, especially because a
>> source publication date is not a verification date. survey can
>> contain the date of dateless sources like visual or knowledge. It
>> can help humanly assisted bulk imports. Please update the survey
>> date of what you verify (a substantial time later), even if you
>> don't add survey dates yourself.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20140616/85fcc247/attachment.htm>
More information about the Talk-be
mailing list