[OSM-talk-ie] [OSM-talk] All places in Ireland - GNS Data now accessible!

[Barry Hunter]

Just a note about the data in GNS specific to Ireland. It seems that there
is a patch of data not full complete, see:

http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/268.page

HTH, but sorry if this was already known, it took me by surprise when
finding this!

On 9/13/07, Dermot McNally <dermotm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (Also copying to the main talk list, since there was a recent question
> about GNS data import)
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Those of you at the meeting in Balbriggan will recall our conversation
> about the GNS data and my eagerness to turn it into usable OSM data.
> It took me a while longer, but some usable work is now there to be
> seen. In the absence of a good place to put it, I've made it available
> here:
>
> http://rapidshare.com/files/55482368/gns.tar.gz.html
>
> What you get:
>
> You'll find a directory structure with a perl script and some of its
> supporting modules. If you know perl, feel free to play and enhance.
> If you don't, don't panic! In the data directory you'll find the
> original gns data file along with the output of this script. This
> output isn't useful for import into OSM, but it's generated from an
> object which will import quite easily (I haven't written the script to
> do that yet). This text output is designed to illustrate what I've
> managed to extract from the original file and to allow for discussion
> of whether we're all happy to see this stuff uploaded or whether we'd
> like to change some things first.
>
> Running the script:
>
> Everything I've done so far will run on vanilla perl - based on the
> location of the data file, you should get some action by doing:
>
> perl gns_import.pl < data/ei.txt
> or ./gns_import.pl < data/ei.txt
>
> What you'll see is the lat and long of the POI along with the
> attributes I'd propose to set for each one within OSM. These are:
>
> gns:<various>: This is to preserve availability of the raw GNS data
> from whence this all came. Yes, there's a lot of it, but it does mean
> that if we work out a nifty use for SORT_NAME or some such data field
> we'll be able to use it without a reimport.
>
> comment, source: An explanation of where we got this from.
>
> name: The POI name. For now, only POIs of type 'place' are being
> output, and I'd suggest we get our feet wet on this much before trying
> subsequent passes for the rest of the items (we'll need to work out a
> bunch of mapping stuff for them anyway).
>
> name:ga, name:en: For places where English and Irish names were
> available, both are entered. Whichever named seemed from the
> data-source to be definitive (usually the English one, but possibly
> different in the Gaeltacht) was used for the 'name' attribute, which
> is likely to be necessary to ensure that the renderers will Do The
> Right Thing.
>
> is_in: I've built a county lookup table of the codes used in the ADM1
> field. Based on this, I've set is_in to "County <county name>" for
> each POI where this was possible. (some have ADM1 set to 00, and I
> haven't worked out whether this corresponds to anything other than
> 'unknown').
>
> place: The type of place this is - city, town, village, hamlet.
> Unfortunately, the information available isn't that specific, and
> nothing below the level of town comes with information on size or
> population. For this reason, I've had to fail safe and set all others
> to 'hamlet' - which I'm treating as the best standard equivalent for a
> townland. This means that points that are really villages or small
> towns will need manual touch-up. I don't have a better idea for these,
> but the alternative is for thousands of townlands to start
> overwhelming the map, and fixing these would be even harder.
>
> place_county: This doesn't seem to be in standard use, but it struck
> me as worthwhile to set a field to the county name (without the prefix
> 'County '). Maybe we'll find a use for it...
>
> population: Only present for a handful of locations, but set where
> available.
>
>
> I'd be very interested in some comments on this. It would be really
> easy to add these to the database, but we should have a good look now
> just to make sure we like what's going in. Since the source is set, it
> would be easy to back the stuff out as well, but that's a bit rough on
> anyone who has already adopted some of the points, enhanced and maybe
> respotted them :-)
>
> What do you all think?
> Dermot
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
Barry

- www.nearby.org.uk - www.geograph.org.uk -