[Talk-is] LUKR import - skýrsla

[Eydís Hentze]

Sælir, er hægt að taka mig út af þessum lista?

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Svavar Kjarrval <svavar at kjarrval.is> wrote:

>  Hi.
>
> The boundary relation does support putting a node where the administration
> centre is. I did so for Reykjavík and I noticed that the Kjalarnes part of
> the Reykjavík relation was on top, which was most likely why Nominatim put
> the mark there. If it works, it might take the change some time to be
> displayed. According to the people at Nominatim, it works better if the
> town is defined as an area, especially when looking up addresses.
>
> Have you contacted the authors of the Navit turn-by-turn software and
> asked them to put in a support for the boundary relation type? If this is a
> problem for the capital area, then it must be a problem for other
> municipalities in OSM too.
>
> I'm not a strict regarding the don't map for the renderer. I only deleted
> nodes (and moved their tags to the boundaries) in the capital area, nowhere
> else. If the place nodes are needed, you're free to add them again. I think
> we should locate those nodes in the city hall building in each town and add
> those nodes as administration centre nodes for the boundary relation
> (role=admin_centre). That way we should satisfy both requirements with a
> minimum amount of extra nodes.
>
> If you want to, I can take care of adding the place nodes again, since I
> was the one who deleted them. I think I know where each administrative
> centre is.
>
> - Svavar Kjarrval
>
>
> On 12/01/13 20:33, Helmut Neukirchen wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I just realised that deleting nodes such as place=city or place=town
> should be reverted: many tools rely on this and cannot make use of
> boundaries.
>
> (For me personally most annoying is that the open-source Navit turn-by-turn
> navigation software does not offer anymore to search addresses in the
> capital
> area due to the lack of these nodes, but maybe more prominent is
> Nominatim -- the search text field on http://www.openstreetmap.org : try
> searching for "Reykjavík": first result is the center of the Boundary for
> Kjalarnes and the second result is Reykavik in Manitoba.)
>
> Of course, you might argue "Do not map for the renderer" and that having
> both
> nodes and boundaries is redundant, but I do not buy this: there is more
> than
> one tool that relies on the node and the node adds even that the the
> boundary cannot convey, e.g. the old Reykjavík was on Austurvöllur, i.e.
> the
> node location was used to tell where the perceived city center is.
>
> Do you agree that we should add these nodes again? If yes, I think Svavar
> knows best which nodes he did remove, so are you, Svavar, willing to add
> them
> again?
>
> Kveðja,
> Helmut
>
> On 11/20/2012 12:02 AM, Svavar Kjarrval wrote:
>
> > Bæjarmörk: Komin inn sem boundary relation, admin_level=6. Giskaði samt
> > fyrir Hafnarfjörð frá enda línu og að sjó þar sem sú lína var ekki inn á
> > LUKR. Eins og áður, ekki mikið mál að breyta þegar við fáum betri hnit.
> > Stalst til að setja þá línu þar sem Nominatim var alltaf að skilgreina
> > að sumar göturnar í Hafnarfirði tilheyrðu Reykjavík, jafnvel þegar
> > boundary relation var til fyrir Reykjavík. Eyddi út place=city og
> > place=town nóðum og færði tögin þeirra yfir í téð boundary relation.
>
>  >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-is mailing list
> > Talk-is at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-is
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-is mailing list
> Talk-is at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-is
>
>


-- 
Eydís Hentze
Copywriting and CMS'ing
@ Kosmos & Kaos
Phone: + 354 - 695 - 5685
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-is/attachments/20130114/e66cc779/attachment.html>