On the 16th of December, I’ll give a presentation at the 14eme Rencontres du PICC in Charleroi. PICC is the Walloon dataset for buildings and many other features (roads, …). The presentation will be about the buildings import process of OSM-Belgium. Unfortunately, the event is already full.
So I’d be glad to have your inputs if you ever imported PICC buildings using the import tool! Here are some questions:
Have you noticed some errors or weird situations in the PICC data when using the buildings import tool?
In order to provide feedback to the people who maintain the PICC data, we advise to use “source:geometry:ref”=“missing” for new buildings not in PICC, “source:geometry”=“outdated” when the reference building is updated, and “razed:building=*” for razed buildings. Did you use that? Do you actively spot new/razed buildings on imagery or in real life?
In OSM, there are armchair mappers, and mappers that only map what they see on the ground. For the import building process, what kind of mapper are you?
Is there anything else you want to share about the PICC data, and the buildings import in OSM? Did you see any weird situations or fun facts when doing the import?
The goal is to have feedbacks to give to the people maintaining the PICC data during the talk. Thanks in advance for your inputs!
/// FRANCAIS ///
Le 16 décembre, je ferai une présentation lors des 14èmes Rencontres du PICC à Charleroi. Le PICC est le jeu de données wallon pour les bâtiments et de nombreux autres éléments (routes, etc.). La présentation portera sur le processus d’importation des bâtiments d’OSM-Belgique. Pour info, l’événément est déjà complet.
Je serais donc ravi de recevoir vos commentaires si vous avez déjà importé des bâtiments du PICC à l’aide de l’outil d’import (buildings.osm.be) ! Voici quelques questions :
Avez-vous remarqué des erreurs ou des situations étranges dans les données PICC lors de l’utilisation de l’outil d’import des bâtiments ?
Afin de fournir un retour d’information aux personnes qui gèrent les données PICC, nous conseillons d’utiliser « source:geometry:ref » = « missing » pour les nouveaux bâtiments qui ne figurent pas dans le PICC, « source:geometry » = « outdated » lorsque le bâtiment de référence est modifié, et « razed:building=* » pour les bâtiments détruits. Avez-vous utilisé ces tags ? Repérez-vous activement les bâtiments nouveaux/rasés sur les images ou dans la vie réelle?
Dans OSM, il y a des mappers “armchair’“ et des mappers qui ne cartographient que ce qu’ils voient sur le terrain. Pour le processus d’importation des bâtiments, quel type de cartographe êtes-vous ?
Y a-t-il autre chose que vous souhaiteriez partager au sujet des données PICC et de l’importation des bâtiments dans OSM ? Avez-vous remarqué des situations étranges ou des trucs amusants lors de l’importation ?
L’objectif est d’obtenir des commentaires à transmettre aux personnes qui gèrent les données PICC pendant la conférence. Merci d’avance pour vos contributions !
As someone who mainly imports buildings in Flanders, but occasionally works in Wallonie, my input might not be incredibly useful, but I have some experience with the tool and the region.
Errors or weird situations:
Not yet, apart from some what seems like small house number inconsistencies.
Feedback tags:
I haven’t encountered any cases where I would need these.
What kind of mapper are you?
For building imports I mainly am an armchair mapper, while trying using street level imagery and the most recent SPW aerial imagery.
Varia?
No real extra input, apart from the minor complaint that the map is quite “flat”, and could be made cartographically more intuitive or clear.
I did regularly add the “special tags” for when buildings are missing/changed/should have been deleted.
I don’t do massive imports (compared to some other users at least), but I don’t combine import with survey. When I spot weird things that require a survey, I usually create a Note. This is rather rare though. Most often it relates to house numbers.
Speaking of house numbers: in Flanders I can report issues directly in Lara, a tool where the report is guaranteed to be sent directly to the person who can fix it. The tool allows me and the regional government to track the speed of response. Even then it sometimes takes years, but OK . Anyway it’s frustrating that nothing similar exists for ICAR. Even with my National Crisis Center hat on, it’s hard to find the right person within the municipal administration to fix things. And even then I have no idea if they will fix things. It’s pretty clear that this lack of structure is part of the reason why many more addresses appear to be missing in Wallonia.
When it comes to PICC proper, the complexity of the buildings (many are subdivided, not always to a clear logic) and their identifiers (why not just use UUIDs or even objectIDs instead of an immensely long string?) make it harder to use the data.
[…] erreurs ou situations étranges dans les données PICC […]
[…] errors or weird situations in PICC data […]
Pas spécialement mais à cause du niveau de zoom nécessaire pour obtenir les polygones (zoom 17) il faut faire plusieurs passes pour obtenir une zone plus grande que quelques carrés de maisons, et du coup JOSM crée plusieurs couches, et quand je les fusionne il y a des centaines de bâtiments superposés qu’il refuse de supprimer automatiquement.
Not that often but because of the zoom level required to get building polygons (z17) I have to pass several times to get anything bigger than a few neighborhoods, so JOSM creates multiple layers, and when merging them there are hundreds (if not thousands) of overlapping buildings that it refuses to fix automatically.
Retour d’infos
Feedback tags
J’utilise surtout source:geometry:ref=missing et source:geometry:date=[date de l'imagerie SPW] pour les bâtiments présents sur l’imagerie SPW mais pas sur le PICC; mais l’imagerie SPW actuelle datant de mai-juin 2023 (!!) il se peut que je supprime sans le vouloir un bâtiment présent dans la vraie vie (et tracé sur le PICC) mais pas visible sur imagerie.
I mostly use source:geometry:ref=missing and source:geometry:date=[date of SPW aerial] for buildings present on SPW aerials but not on the PICC; but the aerials being from May-June 2023 (!!) I might unintentionally delete a building that exists IRL (and is already on the PICC) but that isn’t present on aerials.
Type de cartographe
Mapper type
Surtout “armchair” pour les coins dans lesquels je ne suis jamais allé (ou pas récemment)
Mostly armchair for the places I’ve never been in (or not recently)
Autre chose ?
Anything else?
Le premier point abordé m’a assez gavé pour que j’aille demander une copie du PICC (et des adresses ICAR) au SPW directement sous forme de shapefile.
The first point I brought up bothered me enough to go request a copy of the PICC (and the ICAR address list) to the SPW as a shapefile.
During the last 1.5 years, I didn’t do much in Wallonia. In previous years, I uploaded various villages, hamlets, and buildings that I passed by so that I could add additional features that I noticed to OSM. To the previous comments regarding PICC, I would like to add that buildings are often very fragmented on that map. Another difficulty is that the house numbers on PICC regularly differ from the numbers on the houses. Besides, it is often difficult to check on site because many houses in the villages do not have a visible house number.
. Anyway it’s frustrating that nothing similar exists for ICAR. Even with my National Crisis Center hat on, it’s hard to find the right person within the municipal administration to fix things. And even then I have no idea if they will fix things. It’s pretty clear that this lack of structure is part of the reason why many more addresses appear to be missing in Wallonia.