[Talk-GB] Terraced Houses Mapping - JOSM and iD

Rupert Allan mail at rupertallan.com
Fri Apr 9 18:34:07 UTC 2021


Apologies for cross-posting, but this refers to the Terracing project with
which this thread was started.

Dear Andy, Ed and all on the group,

I have become aware that not all the members of Talk GB are aware of the
proposed project in South Wales, and why I wanted advice on UK mapping
conventions, particularly Terraced Houses. Previous to launching the
mapping tasks, I posted on Talk GB to get a sense of how best to map houses
(including terraces) in South Wales, and to specific OSM UK members about
the nature of the project. Unfamiliar with the communication networks in
OSM UK, I mistakenly thought word had got around about this potential
(exciting) project.

Thanks so much for all this excellent guidance. I really appreciate the
feedback (good and bad) about the Tasking Manager tasks, and all the
efforts to correct these maverick edits getting made. The roads seemed to
have been done outside of Missing Maps/HOT mapathons. These projects are
yet to be validated, and have now been made private whilst we continue that
work. Hopefully, that should prevent further mishap.

I wanted to respond to some comments in the thread:

*Why MapUganda were initiating/authoring the Tasks: *
The intention of this project, once launched, is very much that local
mappers are mapping South Wales - their own community priorities, on their
own terms. For everybody's information, these 'mapathon-friendly'
small-area tasks were meant for use as a demonstration/pilot, and for local
mappers getting trained to refer-to later. I hope to secure resources for
this work, and need all the technical help I can get. Further
tracing/tagging is expected to happen when the project gets properly
launched. It is proposed that locally-recruited mappers in Merthyr will be
partly-trained by members of MapUganda. It is also hoped that OSM UK will
take as active a role as possible in the project, and that some
collaborative relationship might develop between OSM Uganda, OSM UK, and
OSM in Wales (in its different forms). As mentioned in my email last
evening, I'm not HOT staff, and do not represent HOT except for my
voluntary status as a voting member in the community. Although I am local,
I am not claiming to be 'OSM in Wales', and am in correspondence with Ben
Proctor and Dafydd Wyn, but no other OSM Wales community members.


*OSM UK Participation*
If OSM UK projects could putr some resources into help with building
mapping - and much more if possible - it would be amazing.

*COVID 'Outbreak' and 'The Director of Public Health'*
Re the 'compelling' narrative used in the Merthyr tasks, subsequent to the
Christmas/New Year COVID spike in South Wales, more recent press releases
from the Public Health team have highlighted their ongoing/ressurgent need
for a community-indexed map more than ever. This is why I have been asked
to make this feasibility study.I shall review the task 'Description' before
re-publishing.

*Ordnance Survey cadastral layer: *
I am still reading up on/understanding this, but I shall doubtless end up
having full access to it as the project evolves. Current investigations and
discussion of the OS data makes us confident, though, that a new set of OSM
mapping data can be more useful for our purposes. this conclusion is on the
basis of various factors:

1) What is truly 'open' and available to use is incomplete/oversimplified.
(we downloaded the shapes to check, as advised)
2) Under ODbL, I believe we cannot trace to OSM using the detailed OS data
available to Health and other officials (this is the highly detailed stuff.
3) Therefore, we have no platform where we can easily combine
community-contributed data (and community-prioritised indicators) with OS
data (even if we did, this would negate/undermine community buy-in - see
below).
4) Even if we did have this platform, there would be bureaucratic obstacles
to keeping it current or 'open'.

*Community Buy-In:*

There is a perennial challenge of community buy-in in the South Wales
Valleys, and a notorious history of communities being exploited by 'outside
interventions' - commercial, industrial, social, etc... Apparently local
health authorities do not have good geospatial, dynamic, and cross-sector
analytics such as we have been able to develop in other humanitarian crises
when using 'participatory' community mapping. The practical creation of
data originating in, authored-by, and accurate-to embedded 'indigenous'
community needs is understood to be a way of obtaining difficult community
entry, and is central to the project. Another factor assisting with
community buy-in is the international demonstration of allegiance of the
'marginalised' community status, recognised in a partnership/collaboration
with a team from another 'resource-poor' setting.

*Keeping it simple:*

The OSM aim of this was that 'simpler' methods would make for better
tracing/tagging. I had good and varied feedback from Talk GB on technical
building mapping, which could be summarised by the comment 'use
building=house'. This, coupled with the JOSM Terracer, suited the basic
nature of the tagging, and so the tasks were made public.


For the purposes of COVID Vulnerability, tagging should initially focus on
shape, size, and proximity of houses, and number of households - to be
aligned with average household numbers for situated population aggregates. The
Disaster Risk Reduction aim of this is to understand population exposure to
hazards (hazards currently thought to be found around public amenities,
waste water disposal, childcare sharing, and other indicators). These are
informed by humanitarian response experience, but referenced with local
health workers. Most importantly, we need more input from members of the
community itself.

*UK Objectives of the Project:*

1) That this locally-defined data will provide insights as to how the
community themselves identify and prioritise their own risks (fieldwork has
invariably shown that communities are more aware of where disease gets
spread, problems originate, risks are, and solutions, etc.).

2) That this data can be better than Ordnance Survey data which, whilst
detailed, is not currently providing useful anthropocentric/ethnographic
analytics on why disease is spreading.

3) That OSM will be adopted and possibly institutionalised as a resource to
include communities in decision-making and representation of local needs
above and beyond government-informed metrics. Who knows - this may persuade
Ordnance Survey towards opening their data, or at least holding less value
in keeping it closed (e.g. maybe one day allowing it to be shared into OSM
basemap....?)

These tasks remain my responsibility, and so the ownership of the project
is currently being adjusted to reflect their origin in Wales, to avoid
future confusion about who we are calling 'local'. This will allow for
correspondence to get directed straight to me in future. Meanwhile, before
we make the project public again, the task manager and OSM Wiki description
of this project will be adjusted according to OSM UK community inputs, and
with gratitude. We shall add more detail about what notes should accompany
changesets, and I shall update the Wiki using the guidelines above (thanks
Andy - I knew they were somewhere out there). Once the project launches
properly (it's still in concept form) I shall list it on the edits projects
page <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities>.

Is there any interest in a group chat via zoom (or another platform which
can allow screensharing), to go over anything I have missed, and/or discuss
collaboration possibilities? I'd really appreciate some skill-sharing if
that's a possibility. I think this is a very exciting project, and am eager
to get it right.

Thanks for all your attention and help.

Best,

Rupert

*NB: OSM Uganda Team in cc*

On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 1:07 PM Oliver Simmons <oliversimmo at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 at 17:03, Tom Crocker <tomcrockermail at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There's also building:use=residential if people want to map that aspect.
> Does no-one use building=terrace with building:part=house for terraces that
> were built as one? Mentioned as 3rd option on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace
> >
>
> AFAIK `building:part` is for 3D mapping, as per
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings .
> Using it for actual buildings sections like this would do nothing
> other than cause a mess as far as I can imagine.
>
> If we ever do group terraces, it's probably better to use a relation
> to do so as overlapping ways are
> a. a pain to work with
> b. somewhat go against the "One feature, one element" rule
>
> -Oliver Simmons
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>


-- 

Rupert Allan:

Spatial Intervention Design, Research

In Print:  'Motorcycle-Mapping: Modalities of United Statelessness' in
*Mapping Crisis: Participation, Datafication and Humanitarianism in
the Age of Digital Mapping*
<https://www.sas.ac.uk/publications/mapping-crisis> (University of
London/Chicago Press, Human Rights Consortium
<https://www.sas.ac.uk/projects-and-initiatives/human-rights-consortium>)

UK: +44 (0)7970 540 647
Skype: Reuben Molotov
MARINE CALL SIGN: 24VN3 <https://www.facebook.com/rupertanddorry/>

FRGS, Missing Maps/HOT OSM Voting Member
web <http://rupertallan.com> | twitter
<https://twitter.com/rupert_allan> | instagram
<https://www.instagram.com/rupert_allan/> | linkedin
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rupert-allan-03840a4/> | imdb
<https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1117305/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20210409/df8cfa06/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list