and adding source=* tag is to track if an error or inaccurate found later, map reader can easily track the reason to source problem and correct it with other objects with same source. And tell other mapper what a dataset can used for mapping more area to complete.
I strongly agree that a locally sourced dataset with more tags would be preferred in osm. Adding just building outlines complicates future imports which might be higher quality. If you want help acquiring a better dataset, asking on this list or a list dedicated to the specific region would be a good start.I'm generally opposed to adding source tags on elements. I believe it only adds clutter and that information should be available on the changeset.-AlexOn Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 5:59 AM Joe <kasher2...@yandex.com> wrote:_______________________________________________My plan for importing:
I will use Microsoft Building Footprint Data with Bing satellite imagery, using JOSM
If someone has been drawed manually already, MapWithAI has a feature to detect if the area
has a building drawed already, and won't download the data repeatly, so they can keep the work therefore doesn't interfere with these other efforts
I will check of blatant errors such as the building no longer to exist or wrongly generated by AI
such as a building outline in farmland that not exist while importing to.
Area to import:
Any Cities and towns California, United States if the buildings there area not mapped already is there are to
data to import:
Buildings shapes that projected to ground, no other information such as address or height
There are lucky for mapper who mapping United States is the plenty of ultra high resolution of satellite imagery, and imagery date checkup in Bing satellite imagery with JOSM. Most urban area are very new as within 1~2 yearsEvery building object will be tagged with source=microsoft/BuildingFootprints. Changeset comment will be tagged with the area such as Town or City, for example : Imperial County, California or Rural area nearby of Visalia, California
Goal:
Goal are following:
Build the map and build community.
To add every building really exist but unmapped in the United States to OpenStreetMap without creating duplicates.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/US/BingBuildings#Goals
Thanks to Microsoft's AI system and satellite imagery provider
No other datasets will be used with this import. If a building unmapped and if Microsoft Building Footprint Data has no data, either leave unmapped and draw manually. Such case, I will add source=manual_draw
No monetary remuneration will be received of this import
-------11.12.2020, 16:46, "Minh Nguyen" <m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us>:
Can you elaborate on your plans? The two pages you linked to are
detailed but intended as only a starting point for various import
efforts. In and of themselves, they don't satisfy the import guideline's
requirement for fully documenting your proposed import on the wiki. For
example, see the full proposals listed in the table at [1].
Data to Import=building outlines
Area=Cities and towns California, United States, if the area not mapped
and existing in reality and able to seen in Bing satellite imagery
source=Microsoft building footprints--
Can you be more specific? There are a number of completed, ongoing, and
planned building imports in California. [2] It's important that your
import doesn't interfere with these other efforts. In fact, perhaps you
should consider contributing to those efforts, if you haven't already.
(For context, I've helped with the San Jose building import, which is
still ongoing and would welcome help with task completion or validation.
[3])
Have you considered any other datasets before deciding to import the
Microsoft building dataset? In California, we're lucky that works by
state and local government agencies are automatically in the public
domain by law. So for many cities and counties, there are likely better
alternatives to the Microsoft building dataset. These alternatives
typically contain attributes that Microsoft's computer vision-based
approach could not obtain, such as addresses and building heights, and
the geometries may be more accurate. If this is the case, I think there
would be a strong argument for preferring the local dataset and only
falling back to the Microsoft dataset in areas that aren't so fortunate.
Thank you for your consideration and enthusiasm for improving our
coverage of California.
[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Microsoft_Building_Footprint_Data#Related_import_proposals
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Import_from_California
[3]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County,_California/San_Jose_building_import
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us
_______________________________________________
Imports-us mailing list
Imports-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
Imports-us mailing list
Imports-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
_______________________________________________ Imports-us mailing list Imports-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
