place=hamlet in cities

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

place=hamlet in cities

Kevin Broderick
It seems like a previous import resulted in a lot of place=hamlet for smaller localities that clearly don't meet the hamlet definition on the wiki. Some are mobile home parks (trailer parks); others are housing developments/apartment complexes, and I think there are probably some that are more properly subdivisions, but all are parts of larger, populated areas, not isolated, rural places with populations less than 200.

Does anyone see a problem with armchair-mapping these to place:neighbourhood? I am not planning to do this in an automated fashion, but instead to pick away at it while reviewing areas of interest to some of my coworkers, who have noted that an appropriate rendering for an isolated hamlet doesn't make a lot of sense in a more-populated area.

Thanks,
Kevin

--
Kevin Broderick

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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

dieterdreist
can you post some examples?


cheers,
Martin

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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

Mike N.
In reply to this post by Kevin Broderick
On 1/17/2018 5:55 PM, Kevin Broderick wrote:
> Does anyone see a problem with armchair-mapping these to
> place:neighbourhood? I am not planning to do this in an automated
> fashion, but instead to pick away at it while reviewing areas of
> interest to some of my coworkers, who have noted that an appropriate
> rendering for an isolated hamlet doesn't make a lot of sense in a
> more-populated area.

  This happened quite a bit in the US.  I have been converting the
hamlet points to area where I could identify a subdivision, and add the
name if I knew it along with place=neighborhood.

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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

Kevin Broderick
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
In Annapolis, Maryland, for instance:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/157577529

All of the points for which I've reviewed the history were created ten years ago, edited nine years ago, by the same accounts, and have not been updated since.

It seems the same issue was brought up on the forum a couple of years ago (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53057), and the suggestion was that landuse polygons were probably most appropriate, and place=subdivision was next-best. I don't think I can effectively armchair-map landuse in cities, but hamlets in densely populated areas clearly don't meet the wiki definition (and, I'd argue, are distinct on-the-ground situations; an isolated hamlet in a rural area is very different than an urban neighbourhood or subdivision). I'm leaning towards place=neighbourhood as being more correct than place=hamlet, although it clearly leaves room for improvement in the form of proper landuse polygons and local knowledge re: names.

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:
can you post some examples?


cheers,
Martin



--
Kevin Broderick

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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

Dave F
Have you been in contact with the two contributors to see if they can revoke/reupload?
I presume it came from a database. If it's still available it can be amended as required.
 
DaveF

On 17/01/2018 23:33, Kevin Broderick wrote:
In Annapolis, Maryland, for instance:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/157577529

All of the points for which I've reviewed the history were created ten years ago, edited nine years ago, by the same accounts, and have not been updated since.

It seems the same issue was brought up on the forum a couple of years ago (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53057), and the suggestion was that landuse polygons were probably most appropriate, and place=subdivision was next-best. I don't think I can effectively armchair-map landuse in cities, but hamlets in densely populated areas clearly don't meet the wiki definition (and, I'd argue, are distinct on-the-ground situations; an isolated hamlet in a rural area is very different than an urban neighbourhood or subdivision). I'm leaning towards place=neighbourhood as being more correct than place=hamlet, although it clearly leaves room for improvement in the form of proper landuse polygons and local knowledge re: names.

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:
can you post some examples?


cheers,
Martin



--
Kevin Broderick


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Kevin Broderick


2018-01-18 0:33 GMT+01:00 Kevin Broderick <[hidden email]>:
 I'm leaning towards place=neighbourhood as being more correct than place=hamlet, although it clearly leaves room for improvement in the form of proper landuse polygons and local knowledge re: names.


+1, the examples are very clearly no hamlets.

Cheers,
Martin

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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

Mike N.
In reply to this post by Dave F
On 1/17/2018 6:53 PM, Dave F wrote:
> Have you been in contact with the two contributors to see if they can
> revoke/reupload?
> I presume it came from a database. If it's still available it can be
> amended as required.

   At this point it would be much better to just manually fix anything
that doesn't look right - it will be much more up to date than trying to
conflate any new data with potentially edited data which could be a mix
of nodes and areas.

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

Re: place=hamlet in cities

Dave F

On 18/01/2018 00:34, Mike N wrote:

> On 1/17/2018 6:53 PM, Dave F wrote:
>> Have you been in contact with the two contributors to see if they can
>> revoke/reupload?
>> I presume it came from a database. If it's still available it can be
>> amended as required.
>
>   At this point it would be much better to just manually fix anything
> that doesn't look right - it will be much more up to date than trying
> to conflate any new data with potentially edited data which could be a
> mix of nodes and areas.

" and have not been updated since." means they haven't bee edited. The
update edits appears to just add unnecessary 'is_in' tags, but hey if
you wish to waste hours of your time ticking them off one by one, knock
yourself out.

DaveF.


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk