[OSM-talk-be] OSM and SIAMU

Fri Nov 24 04:15:25 UTC 2017

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Roads if you need
to contact some Wikidatians on adding roads.

m.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Jo <winfixit at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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/076498.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 | Twitter | LinkedIn | Meetup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>