On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 10:46:42PM +0200, Peppo Herney wrote:
Hello,
from the swiss alpin club i got a csv file with all the alpin huts. It looks like this
name;url;ele;lon;lat;tourism;operator Aarbiwak SAC;http://www.sac-pilatus.ch;2731;8.152199642;46.55547325;alpine_hut;SAC Capanna Adula CAS;http://www.capanneti.ch/tedesco/tedesco.html;2012;8.995795439;46.49909694;al... Albert-Heim-Hütte SAC;http://www.albert-heim-huette-sac.ch;2541;8.46345456;46.60896248;alpine_hut;...
and has 153 records They gave permission to put it on osm. should i just upload it with with something like http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/csv2osm/csv2osm.pl or better convert it to an osm file to load in josm and do some last checks? Which tool can i use?
According to tagwatch there are 133 alpine huts mapped already in Switzerland, so you certainly should verify the import manually. If you could make the converted osm file available somewhere, local mappers could help adding the missing data.
In any case, I forwarded this to talk-ch.
By the way: The elevation is in CH1903. I also have the WGS84 transformation and osm suggests to use it in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele Yet, if people in switzerland look at the elevation and then on the sign at the hut, it might look wrong, if i don't put CH1903 elevation.
I dare say that most of the ele tags in Switzerland are taken from the hiking posts at the moment, so I'd keep the CH1903 data for consistency. Maybe we should add a note in the wiki somewhere?
Sarah
Thanks for your inputs
Peppo
-- mobil: +41765310394 home: +499113606687
talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2009/9/12 Sarah Hoffmann lonvia@denofr.de:
I dare say that most of the ele tags in Switzerland are taken from the hiking posts at the moment, so I'd keep the CH1903 data for consistency. Maybe we should add a note in the wiki somewhere?
Actually that would make the data inconsistent with the rest of OSM then, wouldn't it be better to do ele=* for WGS84 and ele:ch1903=* ?
Hello
This shouldn't be a problem since the ele tag should be in meters above sea level [1] and, according to swisstopo, elevations above sealevel and elevations in CH1903 should be about the same with meter accuracy [2]. Taking into account that the GPS as a source of elevation is incredibly inacurate, I wouldn't care too much if the ele=* height is in WGS84 or in CH1903.
Datendelphin
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele [2] http://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/internet/swisstopo/de/home/topics/survey/sys/r...
John Smith wrote:
2009/9/12 Sarah Hoffmann lonvia@denofr.de:
I dare say that most of the ele tags in Switzerland are taken from the hiking posts at the moment, so I'd keep the CH1903 data for consistency. Maybe we should add a note in the wiki somewhere?
Actually that would make the data inconsistent with the rest of OSM then, wouldn't it be better to do ele=* for WGS84 and ele:ch1903=* ? _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
John Smith schrieb:
2009/9/12 Sarah Hoffmann lonvia@denofr.de:
I dare say that most of the ele tags in Switzerland are taken from the hiking posts at the moment, so I'd keep the CH1903 data for consistency. Maybe we should add a note in the wiki somewhere?
Actually that would make the data inconsistent with the rest of OSM then, wouldn't it be better to do ele=* for WGS84 and ele:ch1903=* ?
Question is: Is the assumption that ele is based on WGS84 any good?
I mean, ele is not meant to replace SRTM or other sort of elevation models.
ele is used (at least be me?) to tag specific places (e.g. in the alps) that intentionally has an elevation information.
That might be a mountain_pass, summit or alike where you can find a sign saying: "Stilfser Joch / 2758m". At least to me it doesn't matter what that information is based on (it should only differ in a few meters anyway).
This information is what you find "on the ground".
Regards, ULFL
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamping@googlemail.com wrote:
John Smith schrieb:
2009/9/12 Sarah Hoffmann lonvia@denofr.de:
I dare say that most of the ele tags in Switzerland are taken from the hiking posts at the moment, so I'd keep the CH1903 data for consistency. Maybe we should add a note in the wiki somewhere?
Actually that would make the data inconsistent with the rest of OSM then, wouldn't it be better to do ele=* for WGS84 and ele:ch1903=* ?
Question is: Is the assumption that ele is based on WGS84 any good?
I mean, ele is not meant to replace SRTM or other sort of elevation models.
ele is used (at least be me?) to tag specific places (e.g. in the alps) that intentionally has an elevation information.
That might be a mountain_pass, summit or alike where you can find a sign saying: "Stilfser Joch / 2758m". At least to me it doesn't matter what that information is based on (it should only differ in a few meters anyway).
This information is what you find "on the ground".
The wiki says use WGS84:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele
But in practice people will just add whatever they find.
Adding ele:ch1903 when we know that the original is in CH1903 will help with accuracy since you know the original values from which the ele=* is derived .
2009/9/15 Ulf Lamping ulf.lamping@googlemail.com:
This information is what you find "on the ground".
Or from your GPS
-
datendelphin -
John Smith -
Sarah Hoffmann -
Ulf Lamping -
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason