OpenStreetMap
Local updates to reflect area
Posted by BrickViking on 22 October 2010 in English. Last updated on 28 October 2010.I noticed these streets weren't in the OpenStreetMap database, so I added them from my own knowledge, using GoogleMaps and KiwiMaps data for correlation and to check spelling. I also added some of the local amenities, at least ones where there are icons I can use.
Changes include the following:
* addition of Glenconnor Place at the end of Cossar Street, as Cossar Street doesn't actually go around the corner.
* Change of roundabout into traffic lights. As yet, I haven't seen this on any satellite maps of the area, but I know the work was done as I've been through the intersection several times over the past three months.
* Addition of street names for the street I live in, and adjoining streets. Their placements are unchanged, as they were already in the OSM database, except for the aforementioned Glenconnor Place. My comment below about Baynes Place is actually incorrect, I meant to write Glenconnor, but had a forgetful moment.
* addition of local shops and a postal box in their approximate positions. I can't
plot accurately, as my GPS software on my iPAQ requires a network connection to work, and that's a GoogleMaps application. I'm currently trying to get GPS plus Navit (an application for the PocketPC series) to work sanely, but I'll let you know what luck I have.
Discussion
Comment from Ainsworth on 23 October 2010 at 08:41
Hi,
You musn't use googlemaps as a datasource, please read this:
osm.wiki/Copyright
Comment from Sanderd17 on 23 October 2010 at 09:29
Sorry, but your streets will have to be removed, you mustn't use google maps as said above. Once you removed the streets, you can track them with a GPS, the GPS trace is the evidence you were there and you really mapped them yourself.
Comment from marscot on 23 October 2010 at 11:44
I agree, also Google maps have errors like wrong street names and roads that don`t connect to the right road, which we don`t want added. Please do add to the map but not using maps that are in copyright.
Comment from compdude on 24 October 2010 at 03:56
DO NOT copy from google maps or any other map that has a copyright! This is not only illegal but there's a possibility that google maps may be wrong.
Comment from derKuchen on 24 October 2010 at 08:54
In those cases it's much better to map missing streets by instinct. Especially if you don't have a gps. Just tag them with 'FIXME=vague position' and all will be fine.
Comment from BrickViking on 26 October 2010 at 02:43
The street positions have already been plotted in the OpenMap, however I needed to check their spelling against two other reputable sources. Also, I note that a roundabout on the corner of Travis Road and Burwood road has become a set of traffic lights. This work was done about three months ago, so won't have shown up on the most recent satellite imagery available.
I apologise for having to use other sources for verification, but what else do I use?
Thanks for your replies.
Comment from BrickViking on 26 October 2010 at 02:46
To make it slightly clearer, what was missing in OSM was the street names, not their positions (although I have had to move points for Baynes because Cossar Street doesn't go around the corner, it heads into Baynes Place). The positions were fine, except the one example I've provided. As for shop names, I've eyeballed those myself, so I know that if those are incorrect, then so is their signage.
Comment from BlueMM on 27 October 2010 at 07:51
You can't verify the names with other sources, unless they are public domain or license is suitable for OSM. I see it as the whole point of OSM, if people add or verify (& potentially change) data from copyrighted sources, it's tainted & not really free anymore. It also makes the efforts of all the OSM people "doing it the right way" seem cheated :P
In Melbourne we were using out-of-copyright maps from Melbourne Metro Board of Works (water utility). But visiting the streets and noting the name is the way to go (grabbing a photo of the street sign is ultimate - proof that you were there & got the name directly from the sign).
Comment from BrickViking on 28 October 2010 at 21:52
Right you are. Did that last night for two of the streets I've added, but now I have a problem. We have a couple of new streets in our area that aren't on the Yahoo satellite picture (as that was done back in 2006 or so), but as I don't seem to have GPS working yet, I can't add any plots. What would you advise? Sorry if this is a FAQ, but I haven't actually seen a list of those yet.
I can certainly take photos of street signs, and if I was insane, I could even take a whole series of photographs. My problem about photos is mis-registration (scale, x/y/z, field-of-view, the whole measurement thing) so I've been wary of that whole idea.
Cheers.
Comment from Rovastar on 1 November 2010 at 04:50
What on earth is wrong with verifying?
There is nothing wrong with that at all.
I know from mailing list chats years ago many are paranoid about copyright sources but there is nothing at all with checking it with what you think is the correct street name.
If you get a situation where the names are different you can recheck this yourself.
And taking photos of the street signs is way over the top, what are you people on?
If you know of the streets you could guestimate the locations of them in certain scenerios. e.g. A new road that connects road a to road b and certain points in a straight line. Again I would see nothing wrong, and I cannot imagine legally how anything can be wrong with verifying this with other sources, as long as you don't change anything.
The purists will no doubt pipe up again now but if someone can state legally why this breaks any copyright I am all ears. I am so confused why you make it so difficult for yourselves at times.