[Talk-ca] canvec / shp-to-osm
Frank Steggink
steggink at steggink.org
Mon Oct 26 00:53:09 GMT 2009
Hi Sam,
It's either that you'll end up with 0 byte files, or with files without
any outer polygons. The former is just an inconvenience, while the
latter is a problem. ;)
Anyways, before you generate new data, I think someone should have a
look at shp-to-osm, to check if my assumption that the tags are written
to the wrong polygons (inner polygon, instead of outer polygon) is
right. I could give it a try, but I'm not very familiar with Java, so I
hope that Ian or someone who is more knowledgeable is willing to check
this out. And maybe the working of the -t switch should be revisited, so
that tagless elements which are part of a multipolygon relationship are
still exported.
I'll have a look at the extra file, to see if it contains the data with
outer polygons, although I actually want to upload one other sheet
tonight. Regarding the nodes: I'm using JOSM to upload data, and
although this might not be the most ideal solution, it is working fine.
I've uploaded more than 10000 elements at once, and I just uploaded more
than 5000 elements (see [1], sheet 031I01), so this is still possible
with JOSM. Anyways, what good is a bulk upload tool, if it doesn't
really support bulk ;)
By the way, I also uploaded the residential areas of sheet 031I08. I've
copied the tags of the shape of Gentilly to the outer polygon, removed
them from the inner polygons, and uploaded the data. It looks OK in OSM.
(Actually, I don't think that the CanVec residential areas are that
good, but at least they correspond to the areas in the raster file.)
Frank
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2952729
Sam Vekemans wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Frank Steggink <steggink at steggink.org
> <mailto:steggink at steggink.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think to know what is going on. I've tried to convert the
> residential areas of 031I08 myself, and I got an OSM file with an
> outer polygon. However, the outer polygon has no tags. Also, it
> looks that Sam's batch files run shp-to-osm with the -t parameter,
> which suppresses the output of features without any tags.
>
> Solution:
> * shp-to-osm needs to be adjusted, so that the outer polygon will
> get the tags, but the inner polygons will not.
>
>
> Im running the script how with that change.. to see how it works...
>
>
> * shp-to-osm should be called without the -t parameter.
> Is this possible?
>
> However, that means for tiles that have no residential areas a file
> with the size of 0 bytes will be created. (not a problem, as i could
> do that for all the features... but you'd end up with 80 0meg files.
> that would cause a headache when someone looks at it for the 1st
> time) ... or we could just do that for residential areas.
>
> What i DID do was create an 'extra' file, in the 'extra' folder, that
> extended the max nodes to 2 million. (or i could just remove that
> toggle), and a full .osm file will be created.
> ... but remember that the API can only handle 2000 nodes.
>
> and what i also did was create a 3rd line on the bat file that omits
> the '-t' and also in the 'extra' folder, as that should do the trick.
>
> Frank
>
> Frank Steggink wrote:
>
> Hi Sam,
>
> I've just downloaded some CanVec data, and had a look at
> sheets 031I07 and -08. I wonder what you mean by uploading all
> "sub-residential files". I understand that the data is
> separated over multiple files, because of certain limitations.
> In the residential OSM files I also see no polygons with a
> multipolygon relationship of "outer". So,this means that the
> outlines of places like Trois-Rivieres and others are missing.
> The same issue is going on with wooded areas. The data is
> converted with Canvec2OSM version 0.9.4.
>
> I had a closer look at the raster file (from Toporama) of
> sheet 031I08, because there is much less data, and I looked at
> the village of Gentilly (see [1]). This is in the center of
> the sheet. The raster file suggests that a multipolygon
> relationship should be in place, but the vector file
> (BS_1370009_2_Residential_area0.osm) shows only the two inner
> polygons. Are the outer polygons stored in a different file,
> or are they not converted at all? The shape of the outer
> polygon doesn't look to be complex, so I don't think the
> max_nodes threshold would be exceeded. Looking at the OSM
> file: there is only one multipolygon relationship in it, but
> it only refers to the two inner polygons, and not to any outer
> polygon at all.
>
> One note regarding multipolygons: the inner polygons shouldn't
> have any tags at all. See [2].
>
>
> Ya, i noticed that with the water features i was playing with the
> other day. So that needs to have a closer look into.
>
>
> Anyways, some clarifications about what is going on, and how
> the data should be interpreted would be welcome.
>
>
> Thats where the readme.txt file comes in to play. As it gives some
> instructions. But it might need a little fixing up.
>
>
> I'm reluctant to import data which looks not correct. For the
> rest, keep up your good work :)
>
>
> Thanks :)
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Frank
>
> [1] http://osm.org/go/cKHX9ApT-
> [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon
>
> Sam Vekemans wrote:
>
>
> Hi Richard,
> i think your refering to the large multi-polygons such as
> 'residential_area', and it 'appears' to be inverted.
>
> Here's the majic; when all the sub- residential.osm files
> are uploaded
> to OSM, it renders correctly.
> In JOSM, you need to zoom out and load the area, to see it.
>
> I think i'll load a region of NFLD in the next cuple days
> to test my hypothises.
>
> Sam
>
> ps. I cc'd talk-ca as this was mentioned b4.
>
> On 9/22/09, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com
> <mailto:richard at weait.com>> wrote:
>
>
> Dear gentlemen,
>
> I've had a look at some of Sam's test areas. In 1435
> files there are
> zero occurrences of Relation=outer.
>
> So at some point we started calling relation=outer,
> relation=inner or
> completely dropping outer relations by mistake.
>
> I do still see rare nested ways, but both are marked
> as inner, and are
> on separate layers after --maxnodes
>
> I've run 0.6.1 again with an old rules file and see
> the same problem
> so I believe that this is an issue in shp-to-osm.
>
> Ian can you check a 0.5.0 - generated file and see if
> it contains any
> "outer"?
>
> Best regards,
> Richard
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Talk-ca
mailing list