*Resending without attached picture.* On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Andrea Musuruane <musur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Giorgio, > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 6:00 PM, Giorgio Limonta < > giorgio.limont...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018, Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Ciao Giorgio, >>> I always find your e-mails in the spam folder because the "message has a >>> from address in yahoo.it but has failed yahoo.it's required tests for >>> authentication". >> >> >> >> I am apologize, I try with my google mail account >> >> > It's better. Thank you. > > >> >> >>> You didn't provide any documentation at that time. It was just a single >>> mail about a possible import. You then disappeared for about 3 and a half >>> months. >> >> >> >> You right but please consider that for me was not so easy to describe the >> import plan to the Municipality of Sabbioneta (what is OSM, why it’s >> important to share the information, etc.) and after this to obtain the >> license. >> >> > I know it's not simple and I really thank you for what you achieved. > > > >> I do believe it's not a complex import but the review process is >>> performed to find possible issues and avoid later troubles with bad >>> imported data (and I already found out some problems with your translated >>> data). There is no need to rush :-) >> >> >> >> Ok I understand, I’ll go slower, I just hope not to stop ;) About this I >> am really sorry for all this mails but I thought that the import procedure >> was less complicated because it's my first -and maybe the last- time that I >> propose an import. At last I just want to underline that it's very >> important for the goals of our projects because the OSM map don't have >> building in the UNESCO site (otherwise I wouldn't ever had propose an >> import process). >> >> > I understand this is your first import (and I definitely hope it's not > your last!). It's really difficult to get things right the first time. > Imports are not easy tasks - there are so much things to pay attention to. > > I find your goal valuable. Having buildings for Sabbioneta (BTW, it's nice > place I visited some moons ago :-)) in OSM is definitely welcome. > > >> The "About & Goals" chapter you use past tenses but most of the actions >> still have to happen. >> >> > OK. > > >> The "Schedule" chapter is missing. >>> >> > Fine, but English can be improved: > > *The Municipality of Sabbioneta released a written permission in December > 2017 stating it allows works derived from the "Carta Tecnica Comunale" to > be distributed under the ODbL. My aim is to upload building data by the end > of February 2018. * > > >> "Import Type" section in "Import Data" chapter is missing. You should >>> likely say your import is a one-time import, you won't use automated >>> scripts, all the tags will be entered manually and data will be imported in >>> the OSM database using JOSM. >> >> >> >> I hope that everything is clearer now >> >> > Yes, much better, thanks. > > English can be improved: > *This is a one-time import. The dataset will be uploaded as a single > changeset without using an automated script. All the tags will be entered > manually and the dataset will be uploaded using JOSM.* > > > >> You should upload the original dataset. >> >> >> >> I can't. the Municipality license it's just to extract the data and share >> throught Osm. >> >> > I think it's fine but, if possible, I'd like to have a more authoritative > (i.e. legal) opinion about this: we can't see the source data set but we're > allowed to derive works from it. > > >> "Data license" should link to a text copy of the ODbL. >>> "Type of license" should be "ODbL". >> >> >> >> Done (I hope) >> >> > This is strictly linked with the previous point. > > *Data license:* *proprietary* (owned by the Municipality of Sabbioneta) > > [...] > > *ODbL Compliance verified:* Municipality of Sabbioneta has agreed to > license *derived* data under the ODbL > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ODbL>. > > > >> >> >>> It's fine for me, but please note that you have entered an unwanted >>> space in the wiki (source= Comune di Sabbioneta - Carta Tecnica Comunale). >> >> >> >> Fixed. >> >> > OK. > > >> >> >>> As I said, I strongly encourage to use them. >>> Source data license is not implied. Different data sources can be >>> distributed under different licenses. >>> >>> I noticed that logging in is required to download the data. This is not >>> very friendly towards people without a gmail account. Can you please remove >>> this limitation? >> >> >> >> I move it in Dropbox hope it's better. >> >> Yes, thanks. > >> The data still have some issue: >>> - adjacent buildings that are not connected >>> - a building has self-intersecting ways >> >> >> Fix it, sorry Josm marked as Advertising and I ignored them. >> >> > > JOSM validator still shows two warnings you must address. > > >> >> - churches are tagged with "denominati" (it should be denomination) >> >> >> Yes sorry was a mistake depending to the shp field name limitation... >> >> > Now the OSM file has both the "denominati" and " "denomination" tags :-( > > >> >> - bell towers are tagged with man_made=campanile (shouldn't it be >>> man_made=tower + tower:type=bell_tower?) and without the building tag. See >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dbell_tower >> >> >> I found it in the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org >> /wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcampanile >> >> > This has been discussed in the past in the talk-it ML. > > The tag man_made=campanile is documented in the wiki but is used only 791 > times. Moreover the picture refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is > completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a campanile > is man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower (used 10595 times). Even the > man_made=campanile wiki page suggest to use this tagging. > > >> some buildings are split in different parts (still tagged as building=*) >>> and you assign different heights to them. I'm not an expert about this but >>> it seems this is not the right procedure. Please read >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height#Height_of_buildings and >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings >> >> >> Was identified all single buildings that have different height to add in >> a future mapping phase other tag to improve the detail map (level, color, >> roof_,shape, etc.). That was made with a manually split procedure but I >> have splited only the building (not the building part). >> >> > Your tagging is wrong. Look at the following example. > > https://imgur.com/a/LbQoA > > This is a house. It is a single building. This also means you should have > only one building tag on the building outline. > > But you made two buildings (i.e. with two building tags): one for the > lower part (a multi polygon) and one for the higher part (a closed way). > But different parts must be tagged with building:part as explained on > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings > > > >> I have some troubles with your conflation phase which is summarized as >>> "Merge the tag and the history of the existing features through the JOSM >>> Utilsplugin2 plugin;". It's not clear, at least to me, how Utilsplugin2 is >>> helpful in this context. I suppose (because you didn't write it) you'll use >>> the "Copy tags from previous selection (Shift+R)" feature. >> >> >> >> That was my original plan >> >> >> >>> BTW, isn't it simpler and less error prone to use the "More Tools -> >>> Replace geometry" tool? >> >> >> >> That was a suggestion from the talk-it, but I will return to my original >> plan. >> >> > Your plan now is "Merge the tags from the existing features using the > "Copy selected key(s)/Value(s)" and the "Past tag" tools;" > > Please use the "More Tools -> Replace geometry" tool. You have to select > the new feature (e.g. the one derived from the CTC) and the current > feature. The tool will preserve the feature history (which is really > recommanded), it will merge the tags (prompting you to resolve possible > conflicts) and it will use the new geometry - all in one shot. > > >> QA phase is still missing. Do you plan to use some kind of validator >>> (e.g.. JOSM validator)? When? Do you plan to do some kind of post import >>> verification? How? >> >> >> >> QA it's made. As I wrote above after the import I will work a lot on the >> Sabbioneta area so I will verification and monitoring all the changeset and >> I will any potential mistakes. >> >> > Right now the plan is "The Topology Checker QGIS Plugin and the Josm > validator to prevent most problems before uploading the data." > > Please add something about what you will do *after* the import. For > example, you can use again the JOSM validator (on the whole OSM data and > not only on the buildings) and/or use Osmose. > > BTW, how will you merge POI on nodes and POI on buildings? For example the > Teatro Olimpico and the townhall? > > If you struggle to follow this thread in English, we can continue in > Italian on the talk-it mailing list. > > Bye, > > Andrea > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
