[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis and ITO Map now updating daily. New stats for OSM Analysis. New overlay maps for ITO Map

Peter Miller peter.miller at itoworld.com
Mon Apr 11 09:29:01 BST 2011


On 10 April 2011 23:02, Richard Moss <richard at richardmoss.co.uk> wrote:

>
> > Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 08:07:31 +0000 (UTC)
> > From: Ed Avis  et.com>To: tal
> > k-gb at openstreetmap.orgSubject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis and ITO Map
> now updating daily.
> > New   stats for OSM Analysis. New overlay maps for ITO Map
> > Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >
> > Here are some examples of not:name and highway=no:
> >
> >  n=-0.21501&layers=B0TF>
> > >From the comparison report you can see only two
> > errors remaining.  That isbecause the others have been checked, and where
> OS was wrong a not:name has
> > beentagged.
> >
> > If you download the map for that area you'll see some ways tagged with
> > highway=no. This is where I visited and found there was no road there any
> > more.The highway=no way is just a placeholder to mark the not:name tag
> for the
> > check.
> > --
>
>
> I'd not met " highway=no" before, although I have used not:name. But I'm
> beginning to worry about the principle that we are cluttering up the OSM
> databse with stuff that is "not" there.  OSM is about what is on the ground.
>  I don't know what ITO's particular interests are, but should we really be
> putting negative stuff on OSM, just because another map is wrong?
>


I realise that any commercial company will always be under scrutiny over its
motives, far more than an individual and that is quite right.

Firstly, we have recorded our involvement in the project on ITO World page
on the OSM Wiki and there is also an ITO World Category. [3]

Responding to your particular questions.

We are interested in transport of all forms everywhere. We would like to
know where people can walk, ride a bike or drive a car. We would like to
know which railways can transport a hi-cube shipping container and where
ferries operate. We would like to know where the public entrances are to
buildings and if there is a disabled ramp. This is more information than can
be provided from any commercial source and we identified OSM back in
mid-2007 as a potential source of much of that data.

At the first State of the Map conference in Manchester in late 2007 I heard
Ed Parsons give a keynote talk and he predicted that OSMs big challenges
would be over licensing and completeness [1]. This struck a chord with us.
Since then ITO have contributed legal time to the debate on licensing and
the articles of association, and have also provided a succession of services
to support the quality and completeness of the data (OSM Mapper, OSM
Analsyis and ITO Map etc).

The not:name and highway=no tags came out of OSM Analysis. The validity of
not:name was discussed on this list when we proposed it and it was generally
agreed that it had a role to identify common errors to avoid the map going
backwards and ensure that incorrect external data didn't keep leaking into
OSM. The highway=no proposal came from a couple of people in the community
(not ITO) who wanted to get to 100% OSM Analysis completeness and had
spotted old data in OS Locator. We added this tag to the service in
response.

I think it is best to think of 'highway=no' as part of a feature lifecycle
which will have a role for a maximum of 2-5 years after the road (or other
feature) has been removed. In that time it should be eradicated from other
relevant datasources including current aerial photography. Until then it
probably has a role and after that point it can be removed. See more on the
wiki about life cycle concepts here. [2]

As you may be aware we are also lead industrial partner in Ideas in Transit,
a five year government funded research project to understand what role user
innovation and user contributed data could have on transport policy. The
Ordnance Survey are part of that research project and the DfT are one of the
funders. As such we have had various opportunities to highlight the
significance of OSM to many policymakers formally and informally. Our
relationship with the OS is very simple and we provide them with no
information that is not generally available from our products to every
contributor.

I hope that helps.


Regard,


Peter Miller
ITO World Ltd

[1] http://vimeo.com/7347767 (closing comments, but the whole thing is worth
watching)
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts
[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ITO_World



>
> Richard
> (user: richardm565)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20110411/484dc932/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list