[OSM-talk-be] IBPT antennas

Midgard midgard+talkbe at janmaes.com
Sun Mar 8 14:34:58 UTC 2020

Cool news!

1) Instead of doing it once, wouldn't it be nicer to keep it updated? Generating a list of changes
   between two versions of the source file would be trivial.

2) Three meters is way, way, way too little. I opened the data and looked at literally the first
   antenna I saw in OSM, and it was 4.5 meters from BIPT's position. I would consider 25 meters the
   bare minimum.

3) And even then, just dumping elements in OSM without manual review is not considered best
   practice, but since it's only nodes, things are relatively simple and I won't object. I would
   just like to see that they're not placed too close to any other existing node, but that can be
   checked automatically.

Thanks for discussing before doing!

Kind regards,

Quoting Vucodil via Talk-be (2020-03-08 14:15:26)
> Hello everyone,
> Recently, we got the permission from ibpt.be to use their data in OpenStreetMap: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/ibpt_belgium_antennas
> This includes all the antennas (more than 9000) managed by the three operators (Proximus, Mobistar and Telenet) with the info on who manages which antennas and their localisation.
> I wish to import them in a semi-automatic import. But before that, I wish to have your feedback on the:
> General workflow 
> For the workflow, you can find it at the end of the import wiki page. The main idea is that the antennas to close to existing antennas will be manually reviewed.
> What do you think about that? Is it safe enough?
> Tags to use
> As there is around 300 antennas currently in Belgium (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/QPC) and considering that this import will bring more than 9000 antennas, I think the tags of the import should be carefully chosen. 
> The tags for the objects related to telecoms are not well defined. Various sources of information are available (see at the end of this email).
> If we choose to only map the antenna itself by excluding the support (mast, tower, roof, ...), it seems to exist two tags:
> - man_made=antenna (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=antenna#overview)
> - telecoms=antenna (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=telecom&value=antenna)
> the first one being much more used. That's the one that I suggest. You can see more details on the tagging here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/ibpt_belgium_antennas#Data_Preparation
> With the data from IBPT, it make sense to only focus on the antenna itself and not on the support as we don't have any information on it.
> In cities, it will usually be on roofs or underground like in tunnels but in the countryside, it is often on communication towers.
> Mapping only the antenna enable us to later map more complex things like in this proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Radio_antennas_mapping_proposal.png   where I really like the separation between:
> - antenna
> - support
> - station
> Note that today, most antennas in Belgium are mapped via their support (mast or tower).
> What do you think about the tagging that I suggest? Does it make sense ?
> Vucodil
> PS: I sent two mails in a week about import. It is a coincidence, I'm not doing only that!
> Sources of information: 
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dantenna
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telecoms
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Telecommunications_tower
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmast 
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcommunications_tower
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Proposed_features/Key:antenna#Les_antennes_t.C3.A9l.C3.A9com
> - https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/2011-April/001970.html
> - https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/2011-April/001971.html

More information about the Talk-be mailing list