[Talk-transit] Naptan import

Christoph Böhme christoph at b3e.net
Wed Jul 29 22:10:00 BST 2009


Thomas Wood <grand.edgemaster at gmail.com> schrieb:
> 2009/7/29 Christoph Böhme <christoph at b3e.net>:
> > 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)
> 
> NaPTAN includes this too, I was going to check whether the
> functionality was required as we started on Welsh/Scottish regions, I
> can't remember the reason for not implementing it immediately other
> than awkwardness of the way I was parsing.
>
> > - 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.
> 
> I'm not currently handling the NPTG locality ref. If it's deemed
> useful, we can probably do something with it.

Most of this information is probably only useful to find out in which
locality, district or area a stop or locality is. Since OSM will
(hopefully) contain boundaries which describe the extents it might not
be necessary to explicitly tag were a bus stop or locality is.
 
> > 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.
> 
> I tried to create a relation for plusbus zone stops from the NaPTAN
> data but there were simply too many - we quickly hit the OSM relation
> member maximum.

Okay, that answers the question. I simple create a polygon then. I
suggest the following tagging scheme for the ways:

public_transport=pay_scale_area
ref=Plusbus zone ref
name=Plusbus zone name

Is pay scale area the correct general name for things like the plusbus
zones?

	Christoph

> >> 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.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Christoph
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-transit mailing list
> > Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Thomas Wood
> (Edgemaster)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-transit mailing list
> Talk-transit at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit




More information about the Talk-transit mailing list