Am 14.05.2023 um 20:20 schrieb Raphael:
Hi Simon
Thanks for your very quick reaction! Your workaround is very helpful. However, if a building has more than one entrance and thus more than one address, the files you have newly created include only one address, e.g.:
Viale Castagnola 21a/21b/21c/21d, 6900 Lugano - https://map.geo.admin.ch/?lang=en&topic=ech&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pix...
This seems to be an issue with how the OSM xml files are generated, they are present in the geojson files (from which the XML is produced).
Another peculiarity (but not a problem) i found in Ticino is that the RDB data (on Swisstopo and in your files) include non-unique addresses without housenumbers (only street name, postcode and place name), e.g.:
https://map.geo.admin.ch/?lang=en&topic=ech&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pix...
This is "normal" and is the case in other cantons too, they are useful for checking street level localisation, outside of that just ignore them.
The BfS is looking in to the issue BTW.
Simon
The Geoportale Ticino doesn't display an address for these buildings:
https://map.geo.ti.ch/?lang=en&baselayer_ref=Carta%20Nazionale%20(bianco...
Best regards Raphael
On Sat, 13 May 2023 at 11:09, Simon Poole simon@poole.ch wrote:
Am 13.05.2023 um 09:12 schrieb Simon Poole:
PS: it seems as if coordinates for building centroids exist for these municipalities, worst case I'll build a workaround from them.
I've regenerated the per municipality files using the building centroid coordinates. Some spot checking would seem to indicate that this works reasonably well, if anybody sees any other issue pls get in contact with me.
Simon
Am 13.05.2023 um 09:06 schrieb Simon Poole:
I just knew that changing to the new data format went too smoothly: for a number of municipalities in Ticino, for example Locarno, the data from the BfS is missing coordinates and as a consequence the per-municipality files are empty.
I just checked the data from today and the coordinates continue to be absent. I've contacted the BfS about the matter, lets see what they have to say.
Thanks to dafadllyn for pointing this out.
Simon
Am 21.03.2023 um 15:46 schrieb Simon Poole:
I've updated the GWR extracts that are available from http://qa.poole.ch/addresses/ch/ to data from the 20th of March of this year. As the BfS changed how they provide the data last year (that's the reason that this update was delayed), I used to opportunity to improve and simplify how I update the data. I hope this will lead to more frequent updates, at least till the next time the BfS changes everything.
The caveats with respect to the data quality still apply, in particular because of the rather questionable street data for some mainly mountainous municipalities some local knowledge is a good thing to have before using the data.
On a related note, Jonas (loremo) suggested at one point in time that we should include one of the GWR ids with the data for referencing updates/QA. There seem to be two possibilities how we could do that:
- EGID + EDID (Eidgenössischer Gebäudeidentifikator +
Eidgenössischer Eingangsidentifikator)
or
- EGAID (Eidgenössischer Gebäudeadressidentifikator)
The former would seem to be more useful as it allows to determine if the entrances belong to the same building. Any comments? Tagging suggestion?
Further because of the changes it would be possible to generate building type and level count information, it is a bit unclear how well this would map to OSM tags, but is somebody is interested we could look in to this.
Simon
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch