Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix 102063901 #13

Closed

Conversation

pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor

@pathmapper pathmapper commented Aug 20, 2019

Fixes whosonfirst-data/whosonfirst-data#1697

Updated some properties, most of them related to statoids (http://www.statoids.com/yde.html).

Also updated with the correct geometry from de-bkg.

Validated with wof-validate-properties and wof-validate-geometry.

To Do:

https://whosonfirst.org/docs/properties/geom/ states that these properties are derived from Shapely.
Is it a must to use Shapely or is it ok to calculate these properties also e.g. with QGIS?
If Shapely should be used, is there a script somewhere for this task?
What is the unit of geom:area?

@missinglink
Copy link

I think the 'exportify' tool can help setting those properties.

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @missinglink, used the tool in 9e68f92

The centroid coordinates ( geom:latitude and geom:longitude) and geom:area were updated.

geom:area_square_m still needs an update and I still wonder which unit is used for geom:area, since this value is now 0.279932.

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Quattroshapes download links are down, at least since January 2018, so remove the alt geometry and related properties?

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hmm, there is another id, which has the correct geometry but also some Oldenburg data:
https://spelunker.whosonfirst.org/id/102063947/

Seems like "Kreisfreie Stadt Osnabrück" and "Landkreis Osnabrück" have some properties swapped with each other and also mixed with some Oldenburg data. The questions is which id should belong to which one:
Landkreis Osnabrück -> 102063901
Kreisfreie Stadt Osnabrück -> 102063947
or vice versa?

@missinglink
Copy link

Regarding 'area', it's not clear what unit it is..

I can see from the code that python is calling the shapely library but shapely docs don't specify.

@stepps00
Copy link
Contributor

stepps00 commented Aug 20, 2019

Thanks for the issue and PR, @pathmapper.

Is it a must to use Shapely or is it ok to calculate these properties also e.g. with QGIS? If Shapely should be used, is there a script somewhere for this task?

As @missinglink pointed out, the Exportify tool should set the geom:* properties for you.

What is the unit of geom:area?

Shapely uses the Cartesian system, the units you see should be in meters/square meters. (geom:area_square_m)

Overall, I agree with the statoids/population/name changes, they all look great. I'm having issues with viewing the geometry diff, though, so I'll need to check the changes out in QGIS. We recently refactored many of the geometries in Germany as part of #1 and have contiguous coverage at most placetypes... I'll poke around with these changes and follow up with any notes.

Thanks!

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

shapely docs don't specify

Found this post: https://gis.stackexchange.com/a/166682/105333

Whichever units are represented by the coordinates in your geometries.
Shapely geometries are Cartesian and make no assumptions about being Lon/Lat or anything else.

Shapely docs: https://shapely.readthedocs.io/en/stable/manual.html#coordinate-systems

So there is no unit in our case. Wonder why the geom:area property exists for WOF data ...

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

@stepps00 thanks for your feedback.

Exportify tool should set the geom:* properties for you

There is a property geom:area_square_m, which wasn't set by the Exportify tool. Could be also related to the docker version of the tool which I used.

the units you see should be in meters/square meters.

The exportify tool calculated 0.279932 for geom:area, so I doubt these are square meters. Also there is a seperate property geom:area_square_m. Possible explanation in my #13 (comment) above.

Regarding the geometries:

https://spelunker.whosonfirst.org/id/102063947/ and
https://spelunker.whosonfirst.org/id/102063901/ (modified in this PR)
are complementary. We could also leave the geometries for both IDs as they are and fix the properties (which would mean also to swap the label properties eng_x_preferred_longname and deu_x_preferred_longname).

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

The geom:area_square_m issue is related to the docker tool, submitted whosonfirst/docker-whosonfirst-exportify#5 to fix this.

@pathmapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fresh PR in #17

@pathmapper pathmapper closed this Oct 27, 2019
@pathmapper pathmapper deleted the update_102063901 branch October 27, 2019 16:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

102063947 and 102063901 are mixed up and having wrong Statoids data
3 participants