[Talk-GB] UPRN Locations Map

[Nick]

As a follow up, Robert Whittaker also submitted an FOI asking for "... a 
list of all UPRNs that are classified as 'historic', and a separate list 
of all those classified as a 'parent' ....". the logicto me was that 
this would help users of Open Data to then filter these out. The 
response that this was "exempt from disclosure under section 21 of the 
FOIA" - if you are interested follow the link to 
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lists_of_historic_and_parent_upr

I was also interested regarding the details of the batch allocation to 
each custodian. So apart from the commercial value, this is unlikely to 
be published as apparently this might be misleading due to the 
randomness of the data and likely to be out of date quickly.

So much for the potential for collaboration with the various authorities.

On 06/07/2020 15:10, Nick wrote:
>
> Hi Jez
>
> To clarify, what I did was to find a 'suspicious' UPRN (two pins on 
> one building with different address details). I then looked up the 
> address on an online system (e.g. OneScotlandGazetteer or the local 
> authority online Planning system) to check the details (UPRN and 
> address). That allowed me to have details, which in this instance I 
> then checked property sites (e.g. ESPC) to verify the 'likely' error.
>
> If you want more details of the example, let me know and I can put a 
> bit more detail together.
>
> Cheers
>
> Nick
>
> On 06/07/2020 12:34, Jez Nicholson wrote:
>> Sorry, i mean 'findmyaddress'.
>>
>> Also, from this Twitter thread 
>> https://twitter.com/jnicho02/status/1279821108783579139?s=20 I note 
>> that some streets have a UPRN. Existing services filter them out.
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020, 12:29 Jez Nicholson, <jez.nicholson at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:jez.nicholson at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Do you mean that you looked up the UPRN on findmystreet and it's
>>     supposedly in a different location to the latlon in the file?
>>
>>     On Mon, 6 Jul 2020, 12:26 Nick, <nick at foresters.org
>>     <mailto:nick at foresters.org>> wrote:
>>
>>         So I have just started with my crude system and already found
>>         one UPRN
>>         that looks as if it is in the wrong location (wrong postcode
>>         6BT > 6ST ~
>>         and wrong county). If I am correct, then this demonstrates
>>         the value of
>>         opening up data to more 'eyes'. Not sure how we could collate
>>         all lists
>>         of anomalies to demonstrate this to government.
>>
>>         On 06/07/2020 12:09, Nick wrote:
>>         > I went for the crude approach as my computer is not that
>>         powerful, so
>>         > I split the CSV into chunks and imported batches into QGIS
>>         with
>>         > county/postcode boundaries as my interest is trying to
>>         understand how
>>         > the UPRNs have been batched. Not elegant but means that I
>>         now can
>>         > focus on our area and identify those UPRNs that are most
>>         useful to me
>>         > for plotting missing rural properties. I can then write a
>>         script to
>>         > only give me those UPRNs of interest. As I say, crude but
>>         useful to me
>>         > as I can now start to match addresses to UPRN when I add
>>         properties.
>>         >
>>         > On 05/07/2020 20:56, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote:
>>         >> On 05.07.2020 18:45, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote:
>>         >>> On 05.07.2020 17:51, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>>         >>>> Naive question - can that be added as a layer in JOSM?
>>         If so, how?
>>         >>> I'll have to check whether I can manage that anyway with
>>         the new server
>>         >>> now. Will come back to this.
>>         >> Meh. 3 hours in, every possible lead I had didn't bring me
>>         closer to
>>         >> setting up the UPRN data in the same way.
>>         >>
>>         >> Having 6 GiB of GeoPackage or 2 GiB of MySQL data doesn't
>>         make working
>>         >> with the data any easier.
>>         >>
>>         >> I will look out for help from the GeoServer people during
>>         the week,
>>         >> watch this space :)
>>         >>
>>         >> K
>>         >>
>>         >> _______________________________________________
>>         >> Talk-GB mailing list
>>         >> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>>         >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>         >
>>         > _______________________________________________
>>         > Talk-GB mailing list
>>         > Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>>         > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Talk-GB mailing list
>>         Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20200801/f71e98c3/attachment.htm>