[Talk-transit] Naptan import

Christoph Böhme christoph at b3e.net
Wed Jul 29 20:22:16 BST 2009

Peter Miller <peter.miller at itoworld.com> schrieb:

> On 27 Jul 2009, at 22:14, Christoph Böhme wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > "Roger Slevin" <roger at slevin.plus.com> schrieb:
> >
> >> Locality Classification was added as a possible "nice to have" to
> >> the version 2 schema but it has not been populated, and no
> >> guidance has been created to indicate how this field should be
> >> used (save for a table of permitted values).  There is no
> >> classification data in NPTG other than that which comes from the
> >> source - and that is only there because it could be ... I would
> >> not recommend its use as it is flaky, and offers nothing in
> >> respect of newly created locality entries in the Gazetteer.
> >
> > So, it looks like we will not have any classification information.
> > Unless we just want to import the plain names this will complicate
> > the import a bit as we have to somehow map the locations to OSM
> > place- types.
> > At the moment I am having three ideas how we could do this:
> >
> > Based on the parent relationship we could guess if a location might
> > be a suburb or village.
> >
> > Many places have wikipedia entries (even villages). If we can manage
> > to automatically look the entries up and extract the relevant
> > information (population size) from the info box we could probably
> > classify a lot of places.
> >
> > The landsat data might give us some hints about the size of places.
> > We just need to find a way to retrieve this information
> > automatically :-)
> >
> > Alternatively we could just invent a value for unclassified places
> > and wait for people to classify the places.
> >
> It seems that the NPTG data is less useful than it could have been  
> because the the lack of classification data. We do of course also
> have access to locality names from other sources including NPE maps
> for places that are more than 50 years old and our eye-balls.

Despite the lack of classification the NPTG data can still easily be
matched with the data already in OSM. So, while not being able to
import the whole dataset we could still add some data to existing
places if we want. The NPTG has the following to offer:

- Administrative Area
- Atco Area Code 
- NPTG District in parts of the county (do these districts have any
  relation with ceremonial/administrative counties?)
- NPTG locality reference
- Alternative names (e.g. welsh names)
- Short names
- Qualifiers for duplicate names

Do you think we should import any of this? Especially when taking 
the NaPTAN import into acconut the Atco Area Code or NPTG locality
references might become handy, I reckon.

Talking of the NaPTAN import: The NPTG data also contains polygons for
the Plusbus Zones. This data is self-contained and can easily be
imported. They could be either imported as ways tagged with their zone
code and their name or we could create an additional relation that
holds all the bus stops which are part of the zone as well. The latter
would, of course, only be necessary if there are bus stops within the
polygon which are not part of the zone or vice versa.

> Possibly we just provide NPTG data as a useful 'free' data overlay
> for creating localities in OSM in association with data from NPE but
> don't spend too long trying to do an automatic import of that data.

I am of the same opinion. Most of the missing places in OSM are small
hamlets, villages and suburbs and it is going to be really difficult to
automatically distinguish these automatically. So, I will rather improve
the NPTG viewer a bit so that it does not display NPTG places which are
already in OSM anymore. This tool can then be used as a guide to find
umapped places.

> You mention matching localities up with Wikipedia. I see no
> licensing issues with using data from Wikipieda as far as I am aware
> btw. Would be great to tie places up with Wikipedia and possibly also
> with woeids (http://developer.yahoo.com/geo/geoplanet/) but that
> could be something for later.

We should keep this in mind. Although, I am not sure if it makes much
sense to add tags to OSM in a completely automated process as this
information can easily be applied when its needed.

> Regards,
> Peter
> > Do you have any other ideas?
> >
> > 	Cheers,
> > 	Christoph
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-transit mailing list
> > Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

More information about the Talk-transit mailing list