Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Blake Girardot
Greetings everyone,

I am looking to help further develop a set of tags to reflect disaster
event damage to mapped objects in OSM. OSM has already used damage
tags in the past several times for example after Typhoon Haiyan:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Damaged_buildings_crisis_mapping

And after the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2011_Sendai_earthquake_and_tsunami

And in Haiti

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Tags/Humanitarian_Data_Background#OpenStreetMap:_Tags_in_Current_Usage

I have read feedback about issues related to those tags and would like
to generate a set of tags that address that feedback. The main
feedback I saw was that the damage tags need to be separated from the
main object tags themselves (building=*, natural=*, highway=*, etc)
and they need to be easily removed after the damage is resolved or the
event is over.

Toward that end this is what myself and some other more experiences
mappers have come up with. We think it addresses those issues and
improves damage tagging in general. We would like community feedback
to help improve them before creating a wiki proposal page. Our over
arching goal of course is to create the most useful set of tags
possible. We are also going to reach out to some humanitarian
organizations to get feedback about their damage assessment data
models and hopefully use that to make improvements as well.

I know there are other people interested in this topic as well so if
anyone has complete alternative suggested schemas that would be great
too.

Any and all feedback and discussion is most welcome.

Tagging Schema
Criteria:
1. Separate feature/object from damage tag itself
2. Identify event the damage tag is related to for analysis and easily
removing them later
3. Allow for assessed and revised indication
4. Specify type/source of assessment
5. Easy to enter, remember, understand for mappers
6. Works well with overpass/overpass-turbo queries
7. Relatively easy for routing software to work with
8. Most similar to existing OSM tagging schemas
9. Allow for initial or revised damage assessment based on ground survey

For any area or node (buildings, amenities, landuse, natural, etc)
damage=[none | partial | major | destroyed]
damage:event=event_name[;event_name2;etc]
damage:assessment=[none | initial | revision]
damage:organization=organization_adding_damage_tags_name
source:damage=[satellite | aerial | survey]

For ways (highways)
These are the same as above, but we add a damage specific key
damage:smoothness and use the values from the existing smoothness key
values (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness). Routing
software would look for the damage:smoothness=* key and if present use
that value over the explicit or implicit smoothness=* value. When the
damage tags are removed, routing would return to pre-event status
automatically.
damage=[none | partial | major | destroyed]
damage:smoothness=[excellent | good | bad | horrible | impassable]
damage:event=event_name[;event_name2;etc]
damage:assessment=[none | initial | revision]
damage:organization=organization_adding_damage_tags_name
source:damage=[satellite | aerial | survey]


Cheers,
Blake

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Andreas Goss
As you linked to this on the HOT list a few things noticed...


What about the typhoon:, earthquake: or tsunami: tags? Replaced with
damage:event?

What about e.g. damage:building? This could still be used even if you
have building= and damage=

What about the status= and impassable= keys and tags?


> Greetings everyone,
>
> I am looking to help further develop a set of tags to reflect disaster
> event damage to mapped objects in OSM. OSM has already used damage
> tags in the past several times for example after Typhoon Haiyan:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Damaged_buildings_crisis_mapping
>
> And after the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2011_Sendai_earthquake_and_tsunami
>
> And in Haiti
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Tags/Humanitarian_Data_Background#OpenStreetMap:_Tags_in_Current_Usage
>
> I have read feedback about issues related to those tags and would like
> to generate a set of tags that address that feedback. The main
> feedback I saw was that the damage tags need to be separated from the
> main object tags themselves (building=*, natural=*, highway=*, etc)
> and they need to be easily removed after the damage is resolved or the
> event is over.
>
> Toward that end this is what myself and some other more experiences
> mappers have come up with. We think it addresses those issues and
> improves damage tagging in general. We would like community feedback
> to help improve them before creating a wiki proposal page. Our over
> arching goal of course is to create the most useful set of tags
> possible. We are also going to reach out to some humanitarian
> organizations to get feedback about their damage assessment data
> models and hopefully use that to make improvements as well.
>
> I know there are other people interested in this topic as well so if
> anyone has complete alternative suggested schemas that would be great
> too.
>
> Any and all feedback and discussion is most welcome.
>
> Tagging Schema
> Criteria:
> 1. Separate feature/object from damage tag itself
> 2. Identify event the damage tag is related to for analysis and easily
> removing them later
> 3. Allow for assessed and revised indication
> 4. Specify type/source of assessment
> 5. Easy to enter, remember, understand for mappers
> 6. Works well with overpass/overpass-turbo queries
> 7. Relatively easy for routing software to work with
> 8. Most similar to existing OSM tagging schemas
> 9. Allow for initial or revised damage assessment based on ground survey
>
> For any area or node (buildings, amenities, landuse, natural, etc)
> damage=[none | partial | major | destroyed]
> damage:event=event_name[;event_name2;etc]
> damage:assessment=[none | initial | revision]
> damage:organization=organization_adding_damage_tags_name
> source:damage=[satellite | aerial | survey]
>
> For ways (highways)
> These are the same as above, but we add a damage specific key
> damage:smoothness and use the values from the existing smoothness key
> values (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness). Routing
> software would look for the damage:smoothness=* key and if present use
> that value over the explicit or implicit smoothness=* value. When the
> damage tags are removed, routing would return to pre-event status
> automatically.
> damage=[none | partial | major | destroyed]
> damage:smoothness=[excellent | good | bad | horrible | impassable]
> damage:event=event_name[;event_name2;etc]
> damage:assessment=[none | initial | revision]
> damage:organization=organization_adding_damage_tags_name
> source:damage=[satellite | aerial | survey]
>
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


--
__________
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

brycenesbitt
In reply to this post by Blake Girardot
I feel this is a good example of a database that should use
OSM as a base layer.

A rendering engine can match a given primary key for, say, a building outline
to the given damage assessment tag.

---

Damage assessment data is very transitory, compared to the lifetime of objects in OSM.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Blake Girardot

Damage info has been tagged in OSM for a long time.

OSM already tags a lot of temporary and transient stuff.

We are aware of the nature of the tags and want to be able to review,
maintain the remove the tags, it is one of the main goals of any tagging
system we settle on like that.




On 5/21/2015 10:22 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:

> I feel this is a good example of a database that should use
> OSM as a base layer.
>
> A rendering engine can match a given primary key for, say, a building
> outline
> to the given damage assessment tag.
>
> ---
>
> Damage assessment data is very transitory, compared to the lifetime of
> objects in OSM.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Blake Girardot
In reply to this post by Andreas Goss

I don't know Andreas, do we need to say what kind of event it is?

I would lean toward damage:type=hurricane|earthquake|etc

or event:type=hurricane|earthquake|etc

But this actually brings up an issue that we ran into in Nepal.

How do identify the event (and maybe event type) independent of any of tags.

Because we want to map IDP camps, but we want to associate them to the
specific event was well.

damage:event=* seems like it is for damage tags only.

unless you think of it as a "damage event", meaning an event that does
damage. so maybe the key name should be damage_event= in that case.

But that was not what we were thinking when we suggested damage:event,
we were thinking it meant the event that was associated with the other
damage tags.

We need to figure out how best to take different types of tags, damage
tags, camp tags, potential landing zone tags and associate them with a
disaster event so we can review, revise and remove them later.

Maybe disaster?

disaster=nepal_earthquake_2015
disaster:type=*
disaster:damage=*
etc ?

Regards,
Blake


On 5/21/2015 9:36 PM, Andreas Goss wrote:

> As you linked to this on the HOT list a few things noticed...
>
>
> What about the typhoon:, earthquake: or tsunami: tags? Replaced with
> damage:event?
>
> What about e.g. damage:building? This could still be used even if you
> have building= and damage=
>
> What about the status= and impassable= keys and tags?
>
>
>> Greetings everyone,
>>
>> I am looking to help further develop a set of tags to reflect disaster
>> event damage to mapped objects in OSM. OSM has already used damage
>> tags in the past several times for example after Typhoon Haiyan:
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Damaged_buildings_crisis_mapping
>>
>> And after the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2011_Sendai_earthquake_and_tsunami
>>
>> And in Haiti
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Tags/Humanitarian_Data_Background#OpenStreetMap:_Tags_in_Current_Usage
>>
>>
>> I have read feedback about issues related to those tags and would like
>> to generate a set of tags that address that feedback. The main
>> feedback I saw was that the damage tags need to be separated from the
>> main object tags themselves (building=*, natural=*, highway=*, etc)
>> and they need to be easily removed after the damage is resolved or the
>> event is over.
>>
>> Toward that end this is what myself and some other more experiences
>> mappers have come up with. We think it addresses those issues and
>> improves damage tagging in general. We would like community feedback
>> to help improve them before creating a wiki proposal page. Our over
>> arching goal of course is to create the most useful set of tags
>> possible. We are also going to reach out to some humanitarian
>> organizations to get feedback about their damage assessment data
>> models and hopefully use that to make improvements as well.
>>
>> I know there are other people interested in this topic as well so if
>> anyone has complete alternative suggested schemas that would be great
>> too.
>>
>> Any and all feedback and discussion is most welcome.
>>
>> Tagging Schema
>> Criteria:
>> 1. Separate feature/object from damage tag itself
>> 2. Identify event the damage tag is related to for analysis and easily
>> removing them later
>> 3. Allow for assessed and revised indication
>> 4. Specify type/source of assessment
>> 5. Easy to enter, remember, understand for mappers
>> 6. Works well with overpass/overpass-turbo queries
>> 7. Relatively easy for routing software to work with
>> 8. Most similar to existing OSM tagging schemas
>> 9. Allow for initial or revised damage assessment based on ground survey
>>
>> For any area or node (buildings, amenities, landuse, natural, etc)
>> damage=[none | partial | major | destroyed]
>> damage:event=event_name[;event_name2;etc]
>> damage:assessment=[none | initial | revision]
>> damage:organization=organization_adding_damage_tags_name
>> source:damage=[satellite | aerial | survey]
>>
>> For ways (highways)
>> These are the same as above, but we add a damage specific key
>> damage:smoothness and use the values from the existing smoothness key
>> values (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness). Routing
>> software would look for the damage:smoothness=* key and if present use
>> that value over the explicit or implicit smoothness=* value. When the
>> damage tags are removed, routing would return to pre-event status
>> automatically.
>> damage=[none | partial | major | destroyed]
>> damage:smoothness=[excellent | good | bad | horrible | impassable]
>> damage:event=event_name[;event_name2;etc]
>> damage:assessment=[none | initial | revision]
>> damage:organization=organization_adding_damage_tags_name
>> source:damage=[satellite | aerial | survey]
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Blake
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

brycenesbitt
In reply to this post by Blake Girardot
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Blake Girardot <[hidden email]> wrote:

Damage info has been tagged in OSM for a long time.
OSM already tags a lot of temporary and transient stuff.
 
We are aware of the nature of the tags and want to be able to review, maintain the remove the tags, it is one of the main goals of any tagging system we settle on like that.


Yes, OSM has transient and temporary stuff, but maybe it's time to transition away from that.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Rafael Avila Coya
Hi, Bryce:

Everything is temporary: the highway surfaces, oneway, classification...

Railways go disused and new ones are constructed every day.

Thousands of shops close everyday, to reopen with a new name and type (and contact:*...)

Farmlands go greenfields, then construction, then residential and finally brownfield, sometimes in a short time.

Internal displaced camps are spontaneously created by people in, let's say Nepal, where there was a common before. It grows. It then becomes official when rescue teams install a field hospital, a drinking water source, toilets, until one day the camp is emptied and it becomes a common again.

Yes. Everything is temporary. So whatever we do in OSM for temporary objects has to be applied to ALL objects.

Cheers,

Rafael.


El 21 de mayo de 2015 16:54:06 CDT, Bryce Nesbitt <[hidden email]> escribió:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Blake Girardot <[hidden email]> wrote:

Damage info has been tagged in OSM for a long time.
OSM already tags a lot of temporary and transient stuff.
 
We are aware of the nature of the tags and want to be able to review, maintain the remove the tags, it is one of the main goals of any tagging system we settle on like that.


Yes, OSM has transient and temporary stuff, but maybe it's time to transition away from that.



Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

brycenesbitt
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi, Bryce:
Yes. Everything is temporary. So whatever we do in OSM for temporary objects has to be applied to ALL objects.

We don't store the number of chickens found in each compound.
We do store railways, the traces of which are often found a hundred years after construction.

-------------------------------

Somewhere in the middle is a boundary. 

The mapping of survey data feels to be better served by use of OSM as a base map, rather than attributes of the base map.
The survey data as well involves a judgement: the type that's often not verifiable or maintainable by a latter mapper.

That "temporary" road clearly belongs in OSM.  When it's replaced, an on the ground mapper can see that situation
and adjust.  No so for the chicken count, or the damage assessment data.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Blake Girardot

On 5/22/2015 1:43 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:

> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi, Bryce:
>     Yes. Everything is temporary. So whatever we do in OSM for temporary
>     objects has to be applied to ALL objects.
>
>
> We don't store the number of chickens found in each compound.
> We do store railways, the traces of which are often found a hundred
> years after construction.
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Somewhere in the middle is a boundary.
>
> The mapping of survey data feels to be better served by use of OSM as a
> base map, rather than attributes of the base map.
> The survey data as well involves a judgement: the type that's often not
> verifiable or maintainable by a latter mapper.
>
> That "temporary" road clearly belongs in OSM.  When it's replaced, an on
> the ground mapper can see that situation
> and adjust.  No so for the chicken count, or the damage assessment data.
>


While I appreciate this discussion, I don't feel this is the place for it.

Things like damaged/blocked roads, bridges, dams and even building
damage data are verifiable on the ground. We work to train people in
areas where OSM has little to no reach how to survey, confirm and care
take the data.

OSM is about mapping what is important to people, and believe me, if the
only bridge for 50km is out that is important to me and others.

I don't think we really tag this sort of damage very often, but when and
where we do, we and others consider it important data.

So I would really like to get the most sensible tagging possible for
damaged infrastructure and buildings and other disaster event related
objects so where it makes sense to tag those in OSM we can tag them well.

Regards
blake

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

brycenesbitt
Note that just because you can collect some data, does not make it a good idea to put in OSM.  Maintenance is harder than collection: and who's going to go back three years after the HOT event and clean up?

-------------
Keep in mind this tagging mailing list is a tiny and non-representative slice of OSM mappers.


-------------
If the only bridge for 50km is out, then what you really need involves using tags that are recognized by rendering and routing software.  Now you don't need cooperation from nearly as many routing or rendering teams to have useful impact. For example:

barrier=damage
access=no
damage:event=2016_roswell_invasion
lastcheck=2016-01-01
lastcheck:note=The entire bridge is glowing green, should not be used.
lastcheck:status=broken


The good thing here is that naive routing software would skip the route, but smart software could count damage as a warning.  For example a trip planner might return:

    Route 1: 500km via Highway 12
    Route 2: 100km via Highway 3  (Warning uses 3 road segments marked as damaged as recently as 2016-01-01).



-------------
There's also a line between "damaged" and "disused".  For example:

disused:highway=tertiary
disused:bridge=yes
damage:event=2016_roswell_invasion
lastcheck=2016-01-02
lastcheck:note=The entire bridge was lifted into space by aliens.  Use dirt road instead.
lastcheck:status=broken

Which hides the feature from nearly all automated processing, without actually removing it from the database.
Quite often a damaged feature will turn into a ruin or a disused feature.  At some point it's appropriate to remove it from
the map, which the disused namespace effectively does.


-------------
There's a lot of similarity between this "damage" set of tagging, and tagging for "last field checked".  The field check data has been used for water fountains, toilets and AEDs.  As with damage, multiple people have approached the last checked concept over the years, but no tagging method has really stuck.

The damage concept may get more traction if it applies not just to a HOT worldview, but also to anything a field mapper might find
broken or in need or repair in the world.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Frederik Ramm
In reply to this post by Blake Girardot
Hi,

On 05/22/2015 06:12 AM, Blake Girardot wrote:
> OSM is about mapping what is important to people

AND on the ground. Important alone doesn't suffice.

> and believe me, if the
> only bridge for 50km is out that is important to me and others.

Yes, of course. If there is no bridge left at all then we'd simply
delete - or refrain from mapping - the bridge (rather than create an
object saying there was a bridge but it's gone now).

Incidentally this means that OSM is not suitable for use cases like
"let's plot all the damage done by disaster <X>" because if the damage
is obliteration then there will be nothing in OSM that we can plot.

I can see how drawing maps that detail the damage done by a certain
disaster event is an interesting use case but I don't see this within
the realm of OSM.

If a broken bridge remains, then we can map a broken bridge. If a civil
engineer looks at the bridge and is able to further specify the state
the bridge is in - for example to allow others to estimate how big the
repair effort might be - that's also an observable fact that could be
mapped.

Whether the bridge was broken by a hurricane or an earthquake or in a
war, will often not be easy to discern on the ground. Therefore I view a
tag that details the event which broke the bridge, and when that event
happened, as problematic.

This doesn't mean this is not important to people, for example if the
bridge was damaged by a disaster then relief funds might be allocated
for repair, whereas if the bridge just crumbled on its own accord then
no funds might be available.

But this already shows that if we deviate from our usual course of "map
what's on the ground", we risk getting involved in politics. "This
bridge was broken even before the quake!" "No it wasnt!" "Yes it was,
you know full well that lorries always had to take the detour" - Surely
it is not for OSM to (help) decide whether relief funds are used to
repair a certain bridge...

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail [hidden email]  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

dieterdreist




> Am 22.05.2015 um 09:04 schrieb Frederik Ramm <[hidden email]>:
>
> Yes, of course. If there is no bridge left at all then we'd simply
> delete - or refrain from mapping - the bridge (rather than create an
> object saying there was a bridge but it's gone now).
>
> Incidentally this means that OSM is not suitable for use cases like
> "let's plot all the damage done by disaster <X>" because if the damage
> is obliteration then there will be nothing in OSM that we can plot.


it depends on the structure of the bridge but if it is/was a stone bridge or steel or concrete (i.e. a big serious bridge) it will typically not completely vanish, even if heavily damaged and temporarily unusable the situation will still be very different to no bridge at all (repairing will often be possible and done, and be much less work compared to starting from scratch, eg foundations)

Few here will remember WW II ;-) but we all know the pictures.
In 1945, Germany, after the war, reconstruction was less work than starting from scratch because even if it looked like total destruction, the streets impassable and blocked by rubble, but the sewage system, underground infrastructure, overground city layout, were still mostly sane, and allowed for much faster reconstruction than new development of a settlement would have been. Actually more buildings and structure has break destroyed in the time after the war (50ies/60ies) with the will of modernization than had been destroyed in the war.

cheers
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Warin
On 22/05/2015 5:32 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

>
>
>
>> Am 22.05.2015 um 09:04 schrieb Frederik Ramm <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Yes, of course. If there is no bridge left at all then we'd simply
>> delete - or refrain from mapping - the bridge (rather than create an
>> object saying there was a bridge but it's gone now).
>>
>> Incidentally this means that OSM is not suitable for use cases like
>> "let's plot all the damage done by disaster <X>" because if the damage
>> is obliteration then there will be nothing in OSM that we can plot.

The undamaged sections can be plotted in OSM .. the missing sections can be added when they are repaired/replaced.
If a bridge is damaged .. then the road remains and can be plotted.

>
> it depends on the structure of the bridge but if it is/was a stone bridge or steel or concrete (i.e. a big serious bridge) it will typically not completely vanish, even if heavily damaged and temporarily unusable the situation will still be very different to no bridge at all (repairing will often be possible and done, and be much less work compared to starting from scratch, eg foundations)
>
> Few here will remember WW II ;-) but we all know the pictures.
> In 1945, Germany, after the war, reconstruction was less work than starting from scratch because even if it looked like total destruction, the streets impassable and blocked by rubble, but the sewage system, underground infrastructure, overground city layout, were still mostly sane, and allowed for much faster reconstruction than new development of a settlement would have been. Actually more buildings and structure has break destroyed in the time after the war (50ies/60ies) with the will of modernization than had been destroyed in the war.
>
>
For much the same reason .. things damaged will be repaired/replaced.
The reasons why those things were there are the reasons why they will reappear in the same place. Possibly better built.

Some years ago there was a bushfire near me. It burnt out quite a few old wooden bridges.
Those roads were closed for quite some time. But the bridges were replaced.. this time with concrete ones .. new foundations included.
The bridges are in the same locations, they may have moved 1 metre .. and might be a bit wider, guard rails further apart, but in general the same.
Much quicker and cheaper to repair/replace sections that are damaged than place a new road + bridges elsewhere.

Under those conditions .. marking something damaged maybe best practice.
When the repair/replacement is completed OSM can remove the tagging of damaged.




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

dieterdreist

2015-05-22 12:14 GMT+02:00 Warin <[hidden email]>:
Much quicker and cheaper to repair/replace sections that are damaged than place a new road + bridges elsewhere.



yes, also because typically there has been a reason why a certain spot has been chosen for the bridge (topography, river width etc.) so even if literally nothing would have remained there is still high probability that a new bridge would be built at the same location (also because of the street), unless the spot had originally been chosen badly and this would now be corrected.

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Richard Z.
In reply to this post by brycenesbitt
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:52:06PM -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Note that just because you can collect some data, does not make it a good
> idea to put in OSM.  Maintenance is harder than collection: and who's going
> to go back three years after the HOT event and clean up?

same is even worse with other data like phone=*


Richard

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Richard Z.
In reply to this post by Andreas Goss
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:36:10PM +0200, Andreas Goss wrote:

> As you linked to this on the HOT list a few things noticed...
>
>
> What about the typhoon:, earthquake: or tsunami: tags? Replaced with
> damage:event?
>
> What about e.g. damage:building? This could still be used even if you have
> building= and damage=
>
> What about the status= and impassable= keys and tags?

some of the lifycecle prefixes would fit this situation and are already
documented and in use.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Richard

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Blake Girardot
In reply to this post by Frederik Ramm
These replies are all very helpful, thank you very much.

On 5/22/2015 9:04 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Whether the bridge was broken by a hurricane or an earthquake or in a
> war, will often not be easy to discern on the ground. Therefore I view a
> tag that details the event which broke the bridge, and when that event
> happened, as problematic.

The intention of the damage:event=* or maybe disaster:event=*  tag
doesn't have much to do with assigning causation, and has more to do
with tag maintenance. We want to be able to run projects that get
objects that were tagged with an event related tag to review, revise or
remove them.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Warin
In reply to this post by Richard Z.
On 22/05/2015 8:54 PM, Richard Z. wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:52:06PM -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>> Note that just because you can collect some data, does not make it a good
>> idea to put in OSM.  Maintenance is harder than collection: and who's going
>> to go back three years after the HOT event and clean up?
> same is even worse with other data like phone=*
>
>
>
I think the data should be entered.
It reflects what is on the ground now.
While HOT is going on (and that may be some months) corrections and updating will take place.

In the longer term OSM users will correct/maintain data .. the time period of corrections/maintance simply reflects the rate of use in that area.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

brycenesbitt
In reply to this post by Richard Z.

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:54 AM, Richard Z. <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:52:06PM -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Note that just because you can collect some data, does not make it a good
> idea to put in OSM.  Maintenance is harder than collection: and who's going
> to go back three years after the HOT event and clean up?

same is even worse with other data like phone=*
 
Phone is an interesting one.
I view it as helpful.
When the phone number or website change registration, it's a flat that the OSM data is out of date.
In my website tag checker, I load the website given and look for the phone number.

What it kicks out primarily are lots of restaurants that are in OSM but out of business.

---
The damage stuff however has no such cross check.  It will likely rot in the OSM database,
getting more and more unverifiable.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

brycenesbitt
In reply to this post by Blake Girardot
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 5:02 AM, Blake Girardot <[hidden email]> wrote:
The intention of the damage:event=* or maybe disaster:event=*  tag doesn't have much to do with assigning causation, and has more to do with tag maintenance. We want to be able to run projects that get objects that were tagged with an event related tag to review, revise or remove them.

But why put that node/way status in the OSM dataset itself, rather than in a HOT tasking manager. 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12