[OSM-talk-be] OSM and SIAMU

[Jo]

If I  understood correctly every single street name of the Netherlands is
already in Wikidata.

2017-11-23 14:31 GMT+01:00 joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>:

> Jo,
> Does Urbis hold the same authority about the correct street name as CRAB
> does in Flanders? I've understood there might not be a single authoritaive
> list for Brussels, but I'm not sure.
> Do you have an idea on how it would actually work on this scale with
> Wikidata? Do you know of some projects that use Wikidata on that scale? I'm
> asking because I think Agentschap Informatie Vlaanderen might be really
> interested in linking their data to Wikidata, and from there to OSM. It
> helps that it allows for a single datamodel for any country that uses
> street names. And thus for one single QA tool to keep street names valid
> anywhere that model is used.
>
> 2017-11-22 22:11 GMT+01:00 Jo <winfixit at gmail.com>:
>
>> Urbis released all the data for the Brussels region several years ago, so
>> it should be possible to use that data like we use CRAB in Flanders.
>>
>> My personal preference would be to work with wikidata identifiers for
>> every street in and around Brussels.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>> 2017-11-22 21:09 GMT+01:00 joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Hi Nadia,
>>>
>>> Nice to see you here!
>>>
>>> I've played with the idea of unique identifiers for OSM objects myself
>>> before. But it remains controversial in the international community (not so
>>> much in Belgium). Here's an article I wrote long long time ago about it.
>>> It's especially useful for the comments, which outline some of the problems
>>> with my idea [1].
>>> Also relevant to get a feel for the issues is when this proposition for
>>> a global reviews database was discussed. Possibilities for linking were
>>> investigated, and adding external IDs got quite a bit of headwind.
>>>
>>> There has been a discussion about wikidata recently that turned so big
>>> that I couldn't follow at all. But at least until recently, there seemed to
>>> be an openness towards adding wikidata unique IDs. I don't know enough
>>> about it to have a real opinion, but to me it sounds elegant to translate
>>> an official source of streetnames into wikidata objects, then adding that
>>> identifier to OSM. Maybe those more versed in Wikidata can explain.
>>>
>>> That said, I'm not sure your proposed solution is the most simple
>>> solution to the problem. Given that streetnames are given by the
>>> government, in theory there is one and only possible way of writing the
>>> name. In Flanders, that would be the CRAB name. In the very few cases where
>>> CRAB is still wrong (or more to the point: the sign in the street says
>>> something slightly different than what CRAB says), you could have
>>> name="Name on the Street Sign" and something like name_official="Name in
>>> CRAB". In that situation, the problem is different: how do make sure all
>>> the street names are and stay correct in OSM. By coincidence, we are
>>> actually working towards doing something like that. In the scope of the
>>> Road Completion project [1] we want to start "attribute/tag comparison"
>>> real soon. Glenn as well has built something that is even further along the
>>> line of being in production, where we look for "close to this official
>>> road, there is no OSM road with the same exact name".
>>> Similar bit different, we developed a website last Open Summer of Code,
>>> where official cycling network data is compared to OSM data all the time.
>>> That way we can make sure our Brussel cycling network is always at least as
>>> correct as the official data.
>>> It's only a few more steps (not easy ones, I know) until we can work
>>> this out further. Any difference in street names should then be fixed quite
>>> quickly. I'd rather see you guys helping out in this effort, than starting
>>> a cumbersome import.
>>>
>>> As far as I know, those codes are only open data in Flanders
>>> (accidentally through CRAB open data). One of the few rules about "what to
>>> map" is that it should be verifiable (preferable by anyone, in the field).
>>> There are a few exceptions, but they are rather rare. As long as the
>>> National Registry codes are not open data, that sounds lie a real problem
>>> to me. In fact, there is no way you can import data into OSM that is not
>>> open. Because then we would have to re-license OSM with the license of the
>>> National Registry :)
>>>
>>> One more thing is that using this ID will give you false certainty. You
>>> will get your results, most of the time. But someone might have corrected a
>>> segment (it used to have the name A, but it really is street B), and they
>>> will not know what to do with this strange ref number. So even after a
>>> succesful import, you would still need something like the constant
>>> comparison described above to check if the streetname is still what the
>>> unique identifier assumes it should be.
>>>
>>> Ben and I have also spent a lot of time thinking about this problem in
>>> general terms: "how do you keep external data synchronized to OSM". In the
>>> case of roads it shouldn't actually be that hard. Say you start of with a
>>> table joining the two datasets together based on the object IDs. You then
>>> need to monitor how both datasets evolve. On the OSM side, you only have to
>>> keep analysing segments that have changed a lot (say, the average
>>> coordinate is too far away; the total length changed too much) or have
>>> disappeared. Then you can have a process that finds if an object that is
>>> similar enough is still mapped in the same place. Only when a certain
>>> threshold is reached, there's a need for manual intervention to check what
>>> is going on.
>>> While this sounds complicated, I do think someone experienced in the
>>> field, could build a model in a couple of days. I think the end result
>>> would actually be more dependable than your idea, and probably less work to
>>> implement. I've built something solving a similar problem in FME in not too
>>> much time (a professional FME worker then re-built it in two days). Seppe
>>> suggested that in the case of road data, a tool like OpenLR [5] might
>>> actually already solve this problem. And Glenn seems to think this is quite
>>> straightforward using Postgis.
>>>
>>> Just out of curiosity: what kind of information do you have that is
>>> valid at the level of a streetname?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/diary/34328
>>> 2: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-August/0
>>> 76498.html
>>> 3: http://www.osm.be/2017/01/06/en-project-road-completion.html
>>> 4: https://cyclenetworks.osm.be/brumob/
>>> 5: http://www.openlr.info/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
> <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20171123/b66d49e2/attachment.htm>