Talk:Cincinnati, Ohio

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Closed circle highways

Linear highway=*s that form a closed circle, but which are not representing areas, need either to be split or given area=no. Otherwise osm2pgsql assumes they are areas and imports them in the polygon table. There are ~270 such features in the metro as of June 14 2014. Nate_Wessel 15:55, 14 June 2014‎ (UTC)

area=no is fine, though I don't think you could expect new mappers to always include that tag. And I don't think we should automatically split every circular road. Routers tend to handle roundabouts better when they're a single way ("at the roundabout, take the 2nd exit to Eden Park Drive"), and many renderers have a difficult time placing a label on such ways as it is. The longstanding expectation, as explained in "Area", is that highways are linear unless area=yes is set. In fact, these expectations are hard-coded into osm2pgsql: default.style sets the "linear" flag (as opposed to "polygon") on the "highway" tag. If that isn't yielding the results you expect, please file a bug on osm2pgsql. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 23:36, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Hmm. Well, I stand corrected. I'm not sure what was/is going on with my osm2pgsql though. I've modified that style file substantially for my own purposes, though that shouldn't have effected the hard-coded area support. In any case, I blew through the other day and area=noed all the circular ways that were causing me trouble with my bike map. There were only a couple dozen that were actually in scope. I also went back and rejoined a couple ways that I had split earlier as a test(to see if they would then import correctly). --Nate Wessel (talk) 16:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Address node import from CAGIS

I am planning to import the Addmastr.shp layer from CAGIS. This file contains nodes for every address in Cincinnati as well as features of it. Relevant attributes are:

  • HNUM - House Number
  • CAGDIR - Direction Prefix ('N','E','S','W')
  • CAGSTRNAME - Road Name
  • CAGSFX - Road Suffix
  • JURISABBRV - Jurisdiction abbreviated
  • UNIT - Unit number/letter in apartment buildings, each unit is a separate node
  • ZIPCODE - 5 Digit Zipcode
  • ADDRESS - "'HNUM '+'HNUMSFX '+'CAGDIR '+'CAGSTRNAME '+'CAGSFX'"
  • ADDRWCITY - "'ADDRESS'+', '+'JURISABBRV'"
  • DATE_MOD - Date Modified, earliest is "2010-08-20" and 20 nodes with null value
  • STATE - 'OH'
  • COUNTYCODE - 3 letter county code ('HAM','CLE','WAR')
  • HNUMSFX - House Number Suffix ('1','1/2','2','A','B','C','D')
  • JURISFULL - Full Jurisdiction Name
  • JURISPPLUS - 4 letter jurisdiction abbreviation, different from 'JURISABBRV'
  • FULLMAILAD - "'ADDRESS'+', '+'JURISFULL'+', '+'ZIPCODE'"

These values can be edited to be compatible with OSM. Addresses in OSM use the Key:addr tag. I will edit these attributes to use the following tags:

  • addr:housenumber="'HNUM'+' HNUMSFX'"
  • addr:street="'CAGDIR'+'CAGSTRNAME'+'CAGSFX'"
  • addr:postcode='ZIPCODE'
  • addr:city='JURISFULL'
  • addr:unit='UNIT'
  • addr:state='STATE'

No county tag?

Very few buildings have address tags, so doubled data should not be a problem.

I am looking for any input on this before uploading.

Unless something has changed, I don't believe this data has a license compatible with OSM. Do you have reason to believe that that's not the case any more? Nate Wessel (talk) 01:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I couldn't find any license for the gratis layers, so I sent them an email to clarify. The reply back was "The free GIS layers are NOT released into the public domain. The data can not be sold or published for commercial purposes." and attached CAGIS_Pricing_Policy_2014.pdf. Point 4 under the standard product definition in the document "is provided in digital form where all data included in the product is controlled or maintained by the releasing department" would be what prevents their data from being used in OSM? --Errorcode (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure that their response prevents us from using the data in OSM. I think we would need to get explicit permission from them in order to proceed, given the severity of their various restrictions. Nate Wessel (talk) 23:04, 28 June 2016 (UTC)