[Talk-us] [Imports] Uploads to City of Salisbury, MD

Nick Chamberlain nchamberlain at ci.salisbury.md.us
Thu Mar 22 14:52:35 GMT 2012

Mark, if you could commit the remove duplicates changeset, that'd be
great.  I will do my best to check if the issues are resolved, and will
gladly accept any guidance on the best ways to do so.  Thanks.

- Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Zoss [mailto:marczoss at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 9:28 AM
To: Nick Chamberlain; Josh Doe
Cc: imports at openstreetmap.org; talk-us at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Imports] [Talk-us] Uploads to City of Salisbury, MD

Nick and Josh

thanks for the clarification on your upload strategy. With previous
large uploads I have experience the same behaviour resulting in massive
dupes. So I guess it is not a conversion issue.

If you want me to commit the remove duplicates changeset, I can do so.
But you will have to go through the data subsequently and check if the
issues are resolved and no new ones emerged.


On 22.03.2012, at 14:12, Nick Chamberlain wrote:

> Josh and Marc,
> Thank you!  I apologize that I'm unable to speak the OSM language as 
> well as everyone, I'm working on it :)  I posted on the Salisbury, 
> Maryland Import page that Josh created to give more detail about my 
> uploads.
> I didn't really think that I created so many duplicates, because I did

> a lot of things in JOSM before I actually chose to upload.  One thing 
> I know for sure is that I didn't I upload until I was actually able to

> - I was getting a proxy error and the uploads were timing out when I 
> attempted to upload the entire batch.  I assumed that these attempts 
> were unsuccessful, which I might be wrong about and might have 
> resulted in duplication.
> I assumed that my successful attempts started, maybe @ 10901673, when 
> I realized I needed to break the original shapefile up tabularly into 
> percentiles and upload 10 segments of the building footprint dataset, 
> one after the other.  These were all definitely successful, and were 
> only done once per percentile.
> Josh, where are you finding the list of changesets in the format you 
> posted?  I can only figure out how to list them in my editor profile 
> with my comments.
> If you believe that the method you mention that removes the 71,000 
> nodes is the best approach, please feel free to do so.  I will also 
> gladly manually fix the inner ring tagging issue as the data gets
> Please let me know what I can do to help.  I am also willing to share 
> the .osm files and/or shapefiles if that will help.  Thanks.
> - Nick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: joshthephysicist at gmail.com [mailto:joshthephysicist at gmail.com] 
> On Behalf Of Josh Doe
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:51 AM
> To: Marc Zoss
> Cc: imports at openstreetmap.org; talk-us at openstreetmap.org; Nick 
> Chamberlain
> Subject: Re: [Imports] [Talk-us] Uploads to City of Salisbury, MD
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Marc Zoss <marczoss at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I briefly downloaded all sby:bldgtype-tagged ways and relation of
> Maryland through the overpass-api. Then removed the ones having only a

> sby:bldgtype tag, run the validator and deleted the duplicated nodes 
> and ways.
>> This would result in a changeset to remove the roughly 71'000
> duplicates nodes and ways.
>> If the area was edited since the import and reverting gets tricky,
> this might be the option to go, at least the result looks ok at the 
> first glance.
>> Please also note that the conversion step seems to add a building=yes
> tag on on inner ring of building polygons () which is certainly bad 
> tagging, despite the correct rendering (52 occurrences, so could be 
> fixed manually).
> Thanks for doing that, as that was the next step I was going to try. I

> posted some regarding the changesets here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Nick_SPW#Salisbury.2C_Mar
> yl
> and_import
> I think perhaps we should revert a subset of the changesets, such as 
> the dangling nodes, and then use your method to handle the rest.
> -Josh

More information about the Talk-us mailing list