[OSM-talk-be] Agiv import

[Glenn Plas]

The current test procedure respects previous editing work, because the
goal is not to import GRB data (not = CRAB) into OSM, but to improve
OSM data with GRB.

That means keeping history on an existing building intact, taking into
account that a human has entered the original tags in case of doubt,
the editor needs to decide what's appropriate.

In the whole of Stekene, I probably deleted no more than 20 buildings
on multiple thousands that got imported with good reasons.  Deleting
is not an issue.

What will be a challenge is training and guidance in a working
procedure, making sure we take acceptable decisions in area's of conflict.

It will also never be fully automated due to the fact that it's not
going to be a flat import but more like a merger of data.

The speed is depending on how much conflict you encounter, existing
buildings are not a problem, but it's indeed easier and faster when
nothing is 'in the way' . But even in crowded places where houses
existed, merging a building just takes 100% attention, a few seconds
and a lot of coffee on the side.

Existing data actually helps on deciding.  The real time consuming
bit's are when existing buildings were addressed incorrectly in OSM
(offset housenumbers by 1 building -for example- is a pain in the butt)

Tag migration and merging takes more time than replaceing the geometry
itself.  Every time the merge conflict dialog pops up, you'll loose 15
seconds, multiply that by thousands of buildings...

I believe that crowded cities will be intensive to merge.

Glenn



On 24-01-16 18:18, Marc Gemis wrote:
> As the other pointed out, the import has to be done /will be done
> carefully. Glenn try it in a mostly empty area and of course it goes
> much faster. In an area with buildings, we will keep all existing
> information. The replace geometry functionality in JOSM + utilsplugin2
> is your friend.
> 
> The quality of the data after the import will depend on the person
> that does the import. I noticed, e.g. that many peoples do not have
> nice corners. So I did a "q" on them. Maybe other will "forget" that
> step. I also removed several additional nodes. I prefer to go a bit
> slower, but deliver a nicer result. Others might import more and clean
> up less. We see the same with the import of the addresses so far. Some
> just draw a bunch of rectangles for the houses, regardless of the
> actual shape.
> 
> It all depends on your goals.
> 
> Depending on the town, you might notice that the data can be a bit of
> of date or sometimes it can be drawn a bit clumsy. It's up to the
> importer to be alert and fix it IMHO.
> 
> I hope we can organize a meetup or a hangout to explain the tools and
> the tips and tricks to some people later on.
> 
> regards
> 
> m
> 
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Ruben Maes <ruben at janmaes.com> wrote:
>> Thursday 21 January 2016 05:35:11, Marc Gemis:
>>> At this moment someone is working on converting the GRB data into something
>>> that can be "easily" imported.
>>> (...)
>>
>> Great that we'll have a more or less complete map of the buildings in Flanders.
>>
>> I know some places where OSM already has much better building information than Agiv, mapped with love and local knowledge. Can I make sure those don't get overridden by inferior data with a note in the data or something?
>>
>> --
>> This message is OpenPGP signed.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>