[Talk-GB] Listed buildings info licence [from: Historic England - tagging guidelines - can we agree on the English usage]

Thu Jul 22 09:43:21 UTC 2021

Hi Ed,

Have you read up on building:part?  Basically, you create a separate closed way for each element of the building, but mark it building:part=whatever instead of building=whatever.   The parts can be tagged with their individual attributes-  like height or roof shape or material.

Then you create a building=whatever that encloses all the parts and has the common tags - likely the address.  (The JOSM shrinkwrap plugin is great for this.).  For extra credit, you can put all the parts into a relation.

Details here
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:building

Appolgies if you've already thought of this.

---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_osm at ksglp.org.uk

On Wed, 21 Jul 2021, at 10:34 PM, Edward Bainton wrote:
> Thanks both. 
> 
> I didn't realise that was your site, Mark. Just the grey data is plenty - thank you. But the wikidata may have taken care of that anyway.
> 
> Any suggestions on how to deal with the multiple building parts? (best pic is at the bottom here <https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1059941>)
> 
> I could call the mid-19C bit and the 1970s bit one building altogether I suppose, plus amenity=place of worship - the functional reality. 
> 
> But looking at the site it feels like splitting hairs to call it one building, rather than two with a bridge between - especially given one is listed and one (most definitely, one hopes) is not.
> 
> Case for a relation, maybe? Or make it two buildings and have contiguous polygon "=place of worship" traced around the perimeter?
> 
> 
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 15:47, Jez Nicholson <jez.nicholson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I just linked it to its Wikidata record. Wikidata has all (not sure from when) the listed buildings, and could aid with additional linked data.
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 3:40 PM Mark Goodge <mark at good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 21/07/2021 14:55, Edward Bainton wrote:
>>> > I like the full name and I like the GB namespace.
>>> > 
>>> > May I fork the thread and ask about listed buildings generally?
>>> > 
>>> > There's a useful website that claims its info on listed stuff comes from 
>>> > the Open Government licence.
>>> > https://britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/site/about 
>>> > <https://britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/site/about>
>>> > 
>>> > I see the wiki says OGL needs reviewing case-by-case.
>>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Government_Licence 
>>> > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Government_Licence>
>>> > 
>>> > Any views on whether it's safe to include data from that site (or from 
>>> > the source Crown Copyright sites) in the map?
>>> 
>>> The Historic England downloadable data is OGL:
>>> 
>>> https://historicengland.org.uk/terms/website-terms-conditions/data-downloads/
>>> 
>>> There's the usual disclaimer that if any part of the data is sourced 
>>> from OS, then OS may also assert rights over it. But I think that's just 
>>> backside covering by HE; there doesn't seem to be anything in the data 
>>> that is likely to fall foul of OS rights.
>>> 
>>> If you actually download the data itself, then the zip file comes with a 
>>> copy of the OGL and a PDF which essentially repeats the page cited above.
>>> 
>>> > Eg, there are some tags I'd like to include on Ivor House in Taunton.
>>> > https://britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/101059941-ivor-house-taunton-deane-taunton-manor-and-wilton-ward 
>>> 
>>> What information on there are you specifically interested in? If it 
>>> helps, the data in the grey box is all explicitly OGL - the entry 
>>> details are directly from the bulk downloads (as above), and the 
>>> location data is inferred from ONS and OS open data products as well as 
>>> the Historic Counties Trust. Mapcodes and Pluscodes use the standard 
>>> open source algorithms as per their respective creators.
>>> 
>>> It has just occurred to me that the credits page doesn't mention these 
>>> additional sources (because, when I originally put the site together, I 
>>> wasn't using them). I do need to update that!
>>> 
>>> At some point, when I have sufficient circular tuits, I also want to 
>>> cross-reference the Historic England GIS downloads with the ONS and OS 
>>> Open UPRN datasets, to see if I can identify the correct UPRN for each 
>>> entry.
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210722/4cd65c26/attachment-0001.htm>