Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Sander Deryckere]

Just got a reply from Camilla @ Mapbox, apparently, they were already
looking into adding the Agiv imagery.

I appreciate the info you've provided with regards to the Flanders imagery.
> This is actually a source that I've been working on processing over the
> past few weeks. There are a few other items I need to get to first, but I
> hope to be able to push that imagery it to our base map soon.  Keep your
> eyes out for another blog post ;).


So that will make it very easy for iD and Potlatch users to switch to
better imagery. No reason to look into TMS proxies. And even a probably
faster server for free ;)

Regards,
Sander


2015-01-06 11:57 GMT+01:00 Ben Abelshausen :

> Hi,
>
> @sander: nice one to email Mapbox to update their imagery! :-)
>
> On the GRB:
>
> Every datasource lies even when of the highest possible quality. For
> example, the definition of a building may differ in some places. Think
> about a building with an underground parking place for example?
>
> It's great that we can use this as a source and this will improve OSM in a
> lot of places in the future. We will just have to treat it like any other
> source. IMHO almost always surveys or local knowledge is better and this
> will be or always should stay our strength.
>
> When looking at our own house I would add more detail, as I did in OSM,
> compared to GRB but this is only possible when you know the location.
>
> Thanks @ Jan Laporte for the detailed information here!
>
> Met vriendelijke groeten,
> Best regards,
>
> Ben Abelshausen
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Ben Abelshausen]

Hi,

@sander: nice one to email Mapbox to update their imagery! :-)

On the GRB:

Every datasource lies even when of the highest possible quality. For
example, the definition of a building may differ in some places. Think
about a building with an underground parking place for example?

It's great that we can use this as a source and this will improve OSM in a
lot of places in the future. We will just have to treat it like any other
source. IMHO almost always surveys or local knowledge is better and this
will be or always should stay our strength.

When looking at our own house I would add more detail, as I did in OSM,
compared to GRB but this is only possible when you know the location.

Thanks @ Jan Laporte for the detailed information here!

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Best regards,

Ben Abelshausen
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Jan Laporte]

Well, up to today, all the work is being done by AGIV. The municipalities can 
report issues with the database, it still is AGIV that sends out a contractor 
to do the mapping. And we always check 10% of the work our contractors bring 
in. Hence, the quality should be pretty much equal all over Flanders.

Now in the future, the municipalities will be able to do their own mapping. 
They can send in as-built plans after construction works (public domain, not 
houses), those plans will be integrated in the GRB.

Indeed, new houses are not yet fully mapped. A surveyor can of course not enter 
private terrain to map the back side of houses. So they map the front and add 5 
meters to create the shape. We are currently updating those houses based on 
aerial mapping. In the future we will no longer release those half-mapped 
houses (people call them “garageboxen”). We have new aerial images every year, 
the houses will be released only when fully mapped.

And indeed, mapping houses is a lot easier in rural areas than in urban areas. 
Building layouts can be complicated and the only indications our mappers have 
is what’s visible form the air (of course in combination with what was visible 
to the surveyor in the street). Perhaps a guesstimation sometimes looks better, 
but still what you see on the GRB is what is seen on aerial images. It could be 
that reality is more complex than a guesstimation. I’m not saying it all is 
perfect, but things like projection distortion should be rather exceptional, 
since they’re mapped with a stereo photo mapping technique.

Cheers,
jan


From: Stijn Rombauts [mailto:stijnromba...@yahoo.com]
Sent: maandag 5 januari 2015 21:29
To: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now 
conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

Even in het Nederlands als ik mag.

De gemeentes zijn verantwoordelijk voor 'hun' GRB. Ik vermoed dat alle 
gemeentes de opbouw van hun GRB uitbesteed hebben aan landmeters. Misschien dat 
updates (zie bv. 
https://www.agiv.be/news/2014/december/update-grootschalig-referentiebestand-20-12-2014)
 door de gemeentes zelf aan het GRB worden toegevoegd. Maar het is dus perfect 
mogelijk dat de kwaliteit in de ene gemeente minder is dan in een andere 
gemeente. Maar ze zouden eigenlijk toch allemaal moeten voldoen aan de eisen 
die door AGIV zijn opgelegd.
De gebouwen in het GRB zijn gebaseerd op topografische opmetingen op terrein en 
op luchtfoto's. Waar mogelijk zijn de voorgevels opgemeten: die zouden dus 
behoorlijk correct moeten zijn. De rest is gebaseerd op de luchtfoto's. Zo 
krijg je soms vreemde toestanden van recente gebouwen waarvan de voorgevel is 
opgemeten, maar het achterliggende stuk grotendeels ontbreekt omdat ze niet op 
de luchtfoto's staan/stonden. De huizen in Beekstraat 55-61 zijn waarschijnlijk 
zo'n geval.

Groetje,

StijnRR


From: Marc Gemis mailto:marc.ge...@gmail.com>>
To: OpenStreetMap Belgium 
mailto:talk-be@openstreetmap.org>>
Sent: Monday, January 5, 2015 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now 
conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

I assume the quality depends on the GIS person adding the data. If he/she is 
less motivated/less capable/... the quality will be less.

The example that you give seems like the classic case where the building was 
not yet finished when it was traced. Then they always draw a small rectangle 
along the front side.

regards

m


On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Sander Deryckere 
mailto:sander...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I think Pablo also helped in some pieces of the GRB: 
http://www.geopunt.be/kaart?viewer_url=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.geopunt.be%2Fresources%2Fapps%2FGeopunt-kaart_app%2Findex.html%3Fid%3Dff8080814a6e1332014abb6b94c80023
Is it normal that quality differs from municipality to municipality? In Staden, 
I haven't seen any problem with GRB. But in Roeselare, I often bump into 
problems like these. Buildings with a completely clear form (however, they're 
often quite new, so perhaps drawn without aerial pics), but drawn completely 
wrong in GRB.
Up until now, I've avoided the old centre of the town, because the building 
layouts are way too complicated there. It might get easier when we have access 
to the GRB.

So yes, an automated import won't work, but being able to use it opens up a lot 
of perspectives, so thanks to anyone involved.
Regards,
Sander

2015-01-05 15:35 GMT+01:00 Gilbert Hersschens 
mailto:gherssch...@gmail.com>>:

In comparison to Bing even Picasso wins ;-)

On 5 January 2015 at 15:30, Glenn Plas 
mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be>> wrote:

In my experience, the outlines and building shapes I've seen in GRB are
like 10 times better than all the work that exists using bing and other
sources.

A one on one copy would be silly, but if you bring it all together,
agiv/grb and osm data, it h

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Jan Laporte]

Yes, it will be free for download in vector format, even without registration 
on the AGIV-website. Similar to the availability of CRAB.
Same for the webservices.


From: Jo [mailto:winfi...@gmail.com]
Sent: maandag 5 januari 2015 13:47
To: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now 
conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

That is indeed great news! Does it mean we'll be able to use the building 
outlines/contours as well then, in the foreseeable future? And, if so, would 
they be available as vectors/shape files, like in the UrbIS dataset? Or am I 
mistaken and is that in CRAB and not in GRB?
Jo

2015-01-05 12:03 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas 
mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be>>:
Thanks Jan for keeping us in the loop.  This is awesome news.

Glenn



On 05-01-15 11:08, Jan Laporte wrote:
> GRB currently is in the process of becoming open data. The agreement is
> signed and official. Only the GRB-decree needs to be edited now before
> it effectively is open data. I can unfortunately not give a timing for that.
>
>
>
> In any case, it’ll be allowed quite soon.
>
>
>
> cheers
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*André Pirard 
> [mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com<mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* donderdag 1 januari 2015 17:49
> *To:* OpenStreetMap Belgium
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now
> conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
>
>
>
> On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :
>
> The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct' using
>
> Bing, and we all know where that leads to...
>
>
>
> We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
>
> frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added
>
> all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
>
> properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious user.
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org<mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be




AGIV e-mail disclaimer: http://www.agiv.be/gis/organisatie/?artid=355
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Stijn Rombauts]

I just noticed this on https://www.agiv.be/producten/grb :' Tile Map Services 
(TMS-diensten)   Bevat 3 lagen: de GRB-basiskaart, de orthofoto’s en een 
hybridelaag met een selectie van GRB-entiteiten voor gebruik in combinatie met 
luchtopnames.' So a TMS already exists apparently... Or are these the 'older 
imagery from Agiv' Sander mentioned?

Regards,
StijnRR

  From: Jo 
 To: Sander Deryckere  
Cc: OpenStreetMap Belgium  
 Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2014 10:59 PM
 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now 
conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
   
It's possible to have people sign an EULA. Would that help? I'd need to know 
what the restrictions are though. I thought we were just not supposed to copy 
their building outlines. I guess the parcel outlines are off limits as well, 
but I don't see those with the paramters I provided.

I'd love to support iD as well, but why can't they program support for WMS? Why 
can't  they be as flexible as possible? It's absurd that we'd have to setup a 
server to convert from WMS to TMS or have iD users use older imagery than the 
enlightened users of JOSM. It almost seems easier to try and peel people away 
from the 'dark side'.

Jo

2014-12-28 21:50 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere :



Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default layer set. It 
becomes too dangerous people will use it without reading about the limitations.

But anyway, thanks for working on it.

Otoh, supporting iD is also important. We can't say "Don't trace from Bing" if 
people can't use Agiv in iD. For that, we would need a TMS. So that either 
means setting up a map proxy to convert WMS from Agiv to TMS, or finding some 
TMS layer available (there are TMS layers for older imagery from Agiv, but I've 
found none for the most recent imagery). Then, it needs to be added to this 
repo: https://github.com/osmlab/editor-imagery-index

But I'm not experienced enough with imagery to accomplish this.

Jo, are you, or is there anyone else wanting to look at this? I think it would 
save us a lot of problems.

Regards,
Sander

2014-12-28 21:39 GMT+01:00 André Pirard :

  On 2014-12-28 18:30, Jo wrote :
  
This is long overdue, but I finally got round to it. I added a page
 
 https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/Belgium
 
 with WMS sources for Belgium, for which we have permission to use.
 
 So now there are 3 more entries on this page:
 
 https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps
 
  The resolutions are all better than Bing. They are also more recent.
 
  Is there somebody who knows a convenient way to add those coordinates, so a 
shape is shown?
 
 AGIV also has coverage for Brussels, The Walloon imagery also covers the 
German speaking part of Belgium.
   
 Well done, Jo.  The only thing to do is now:
 JOSM>Imagery>Imagery Preferences[]>Available...>select BE...>Activate
 
  I don't know much about projections, but EPSG:4326 seems to work just fine 
for all three.
   
 Projections are simple: a mathematical transformation of the Earth surface to 
draw it on a plane (screen).
 EPSG:4326 uses the GPS coordinates (degrees) linearly (d ° NS/EW = c cm  
vertically/horizontally).
 Cylindrical is the projection as if by light beams perpendicular to the Earth 
axis.
 Mercator is the same but with a vertical correction so that the polar regions 
are not flattened.
 These 3 are quickly transformed one to another with little CPU.
 Hence, JOSM, which normally uses Mercator on screen, can convert any to its 
screen projection.
 
 The (Belgian) cartographers use Lambert projections which is similar to 
cylindrical, but on a cone that is tangent to a line going across their country 
(Belgium).  This is so that the proportions of the distances are the same 
vertically and horizontally. The Belgian servers serve them too.  In addition 
to EPSG:4326.  Except SPW ( ;-) ).
 
  Feel free to improve/extend that wiki page, if you can.
   
 I would add Wallonia 2009.  It is sometimes useful (e.g. to get rid of trees).
 Is it just a matter of editing the file?  Have to refresh the server?
 Can id=SPW be the same or what should be used?
 
 What is that (3.xx) after the name JOSM displays? Any way to get rid of it?
 
 Cheers 
 
 
| André. |

 
 
 
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be






___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


  ___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Stijn Rombauts]

Even in het Nederlands als ik mag.
De gemeentes zijn verantwoordelijk voor 'hun' GRB. Ik vermoed dat alle 
gemeentes de opbouw van hun GRB uitbesteed hebben aan landmeters. Misschien dat 
updates (zie bv. 
https://www.agiv.be/news/2014/december/update-grootschalig-referentiebestand-20-12-2014)
 door de gemeentes zelf aan het GRB worden toegevoegd. Maar het is dus perfect 
mogelijk dat de kwaliteit in de ene gemeente minder is dan in een andere 
gemeente. Maar ze zouden eigenlijk toch allemaal moeten voldoen aan de eisen 
die door AGIV zijn opgelegd.
De gebouwen in het GRB zijn gebaseerd op topografische opmetingen op terrein en 
op luchtfoto's. Waar mogelijk zijn de voorgevels opgemeten: die zouden dus 
behoorlijk correct moeten zijn. De rest is gebaseerd op de luchtfoto's. Zo 
krijg je soms vreemde toestanden van recente gebouwen waarvan de voorgevel is 
opgemeten, maar het achterliggende stuk grotendeels ontbreekt omdat ze niet op 
de luchtfoto's staan/stonden. De huizen in Beekstraat 55-61 zijn waarschijnlijk 
zo'n geval.
Groetje,
StijnRR

  From: Marc Gemis 
 To: OpenStreetMap Belgium  
 Sent: Monday, January 5, 2015 8:23 PM
 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now 
conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
   
I assume the quality depends on the GIS person adding the data. If he/she is 
less motivated/less capable/... the quality will be less.
The example that you give seems like the classic case where the building was 
not yet finished when it was traced. Then they always draw a small rectangle 
along the front side.
regards
m


On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Sander Deryckere  wrote:

I think Pablo also helped in some pieces of the GRB: 
http://www.geopunt.be/kaart?viewer_url=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.geopunt.be%2Fresources%2Fapps%2FGeopunt-kaart_app%2Findex.html%3Fid%3Dff8080814a6e1332014abb6b94c80023

Is it normal that quality differs from municipality to municipality? In Staden, 
I haven't seen any problem with GRB. But in Roeselare, I often bump into 
problems like these. Buildings with a completely clear form (however, they're 
often quite new, so perhaps drawn without aerial pics), but drawn completely 
wrong in GRB.

Up until now, I've avoided the old centre of the town, because the building 
layouts are way too complicated there. It might get easier when we have access 
to the GRB.

So yes, an automated import won't work, but being able to use it opens up a lot 
of perspectives, so thanks to anyone involved.

Regards,
Sander

2015-01-05 15:35 GMT+01:00 Gilbert Hersschens :

In comparison to Bing even Picasso wins ;-)
On 5 January 2015 at 15:30, Glenn Plas  wrote:

In my experience, the outlines and building shapes I've seen in GRB are
like 10 times better than all the work that exists using bing and other
sources.

A one on one copy would be silly, but if you bring it all together,
agiv/grb and osm data, it helps to make sense of what you are looking
at. Also it is conclusive usually when new buildings replace older.
It's the best source, I don't really care if the house isn't exactly as-is.

The housenumber inports will take years, but it's fine as it is as tons
of intelligent choices and conclusions, mistakes and other uglynes needs
to be fixed too. And it all helps, if you overlay them with some
transparacy adding GRB would be an awesome tool.

I've been doing housenumer entries for weeks now, grb layer would
defenitely be of good help.  But never a dumb copy.

Glenn

On 05-01-15 15:05, Gilbert Hersschens wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Don't get overly exited about the building shapes. The quality of those
> shapes is quite variable. For free standing houses they are OK - in some
> cases even excellent, but for urban areas they are not very useful,
> certainly not as a source for import. I have been using those shapes for
> quite a while for comparison in cases where severe projection distortion
> and strong shadows gave me a hard time to figure out the shape of a
> particular building and in many cases the shapes in GRB were not better
> or even worse than my own "guesstimation".
> They're OK for "second opinions" but I would never use a tool to import
> those shapes.
> Just my 2 cents.

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be



___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be




___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be




___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


  ___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Marc Gemis]

I assume the quality depends on the GIS person adding the data. If he/she
is less motivated/less capable/... the quality will be less.

The example that you give seems like the classic case where the building
was not yet finished when it was traced. Then they always draw a small
rectangle along the front side.

regards

m

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Sander Deryckere 
wrote:

> I think Pablo also helped in some pieces of the GRB:
> http://www.geopunt.be/kaart?viewer_url=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.geopunt.be%2Fresources%2Fapps%2FGeopunt-kaart_app%2Findex.html%3Fid%3Dff8080814a6e1332014abb6b94c80023
>
> Is it normal that quality differs from municipality to municipality? In
> Staden, I haven't seen any problem with GRB. But in Roeselare, I often bump
> into problems like these. Buildings with a completely clear form (however,
> they're often quite new, so perhaps drawn without aerial pics), but drawn
> completely wrong in GRB.
>
> Up until now, I've avoided the old centre of the town, because the
> building layouts are way too complicated there. It might get easier when we
> have access to the GRB.
>
> So yes, an automated import won't work, but being able to use it opens up
> a lot of perspectives, so thanks to anyone involved.
>
> Regards,
> Sander
>
> 2015-01-05 15:35 GMT+01:00 Gilbert Hersschens :
>
>> In comparison to Bing even Picasso wins ;-)
>>
>> On 5 January 2015 at 15:30, Glenn Plas  wrote:
>>
>>> In my experience, the outlines and building shapes I've seen in GRB are
>>> like 10 times better than all the work that exists using bing and other
>>> sources.
>>>
>>> A one on one copy would be silly, but if you bring it all together,
>>> agiv/grb and osm data, it helps to make sense of what you are looking
>>> at. Also it is conclusive usually when new buildings replace older.
>>> It's the best source, I don't really care if the house isn't exactly
>>> as-is.
>>>
>>> The housenumber inports will take years, but it's fine as it is as tons
>>> of intelligent choices and conclusions, mistakes and other uglynes needs
>>> to be fixed too. And it all helps, if you overlay them with some
>>> transparacy adding GRB would be an awesome tool.
>>>
>>> I've been doing housenumer entries for weeks now, grb layer would
>>> defenitely be of good help.  But never a dumb copy.
>>>
>>> Glenn
>>>
>>> On 05-01-15 15:05, Gilbert Hersschens wrote:
>>> > Guys,
>>> >
>>> > Don't get overly exited about the building shapes. The quality of those
>>> > shapes is quite variable. For free standing houses they are OK - in
>>> some
>>> > cases even excellent, but for urban areas they are not very useful,
>>> > certainly not as a source for import. I have been using those shapes
>>> for
>>> > quite a while for comparison in cases where severe projection
>>> distortion
>>> > and strong shadows gave me a hard time to figure out the shape of a
>>> > particular building and in many cases the shapes in GRB were not better
>>> > or even worse than my own "guesstimation".
>>> > They're OK for "second opinions" but I would never use a tool to import
>>> > those shapes.
>>> > Just my 2 cents.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Sander Deryckere]

I think Pablo also helped in some pieces of the GRB:
http://www.geopunt.be/kaart?viewer_url=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.geopunt.be%2Fresources%2Fapps%2FGeopunt-kaart_app%2Findex.html%3Fid%3Dff8080814a6e1332014abb6b94c80023

Is it normal that quality differs from municipality to municipality? In
Staden, I haven't seen any problem with GRB. But in Roeselare, I often bump
into problems like these. Buildings with a completely clear form (however,
they're often quite new, so perhaps drawn without aerial pics), but drawn
completely wrong in GRB.

Up until now, I've avoided the old centre of the town, because the building
layouts are way too complicated there. It might get easier when we have
access to the GRB.

So yes, an automated import won't work, but being able to use it opens up a
lot of perspectives, so thanks to anyone involved.

Regards,
Sander

2015-01-05 15:35 GMT+01:00 Gilbert Hersschens :

> In comparison to Bing even Picasso wins ;-)
>
> On 5 January 2015 at 15:30, Glenn Plas  wrote:
>
>> In my experience, the outlines and building shapes I've seen in GRB are
>> like 10 times better than all the work that exists using bing and other
>> sources.
>>
>> A one on one copy would be silly, but if you bring it all together,
>> agiv/grb and osm data, it helps to make sense of what you are looking
>> at. Also it is conclusive usually when new buildings replace older.
>> It's the best source, I don't really care if the house isn't exactly
>> as-is.
>>
>> The housenumber inports will take years, but it's fine as it is as tons
>> of intelligent choices and conclusions, mistakes and other uglynes needs
>> to be fixed too. And it all helps, if you overlay them with some
>> transparacy adding GRB would be an awesome tool.
>>
>> I've been doing housenumer entries for weeks now, grb layer would
>> defenitely be of good help.  But never a dumb copy.
>>
>> Glenn
>>
>> On 05-01-15 15:05, Gilbert Hersschens wrote:
>> > Guys,
>> >
>> > Don't get overly exited about the building shapes. The quality of those
>> > shapes is quite variable. For free standing houses they are OK - in some
>> > cases even excellent, but for urban areas they are not very useful,
>> > certainly not as a source for import. I have been using those shapes for
>> > quite a while for comparison in cases where severe projection distortion
>> > and strong shadows gave me a hard time to figure out the shape of a
>> > particular building and in many cases the shapes in GRB were not better
>> > or even worse than my own "guesstimation".
>> > They're OK for "second opinions" but I would never use a tool to import
>> > those shapes.
>> > Just my 2 cents.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Gilbert Hersschens]

In comparison to Bing even Picasso wins ;-)

On 5 January 2015 at 15:30, Glenn Plas  wrote:

> In my experience, the outlines and building shapes I've seen in GRB are
> like 10 times better than all the work that exists using bing and other
> sources.
>
> A one on one copy would be silly, but if you bring it all together,
> agiv/grb and osm data, it helps to make sense of what you are looking
> at. Also it is conclusive usually when new buildings replace older.
> It's the best source, I don't really care if the house isn't exactly as-is.
>
> The housenumber inports will take years, but it's fine as it is as tons
> of intelligent choices and conclusions, mistakes and other uglynes needs
> to be fixed too. And it all helps, if you overlay them with some
> transparacy adding GRB would be an awesome tool.
>
> I've been doing housenumer entries for weeks now, grb layer would
> defenitely be of good help.  But never a dumb copy.
>
> Glenn
>
> On 05-01-15 15:05, Gilbert Hersschens wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > Don't get overly exited about the building shapes. The quality of those
> > shapes is quite variable. For free standing houses they are OK - in some
> > cases even excellent, but for urban areas they are not very useful,
> > certainly not as a source for import. I have been using those shapes for
> > quite a while for comparison in cases where severe projection distortion
> > and strong shadows gave me a hard time to figure out the shape of a
> > particular building and in many cases the shapes in GRB were not better
> > or even worse than my own "guesstimation".
> > They're OK for "second opinions" but I would never use a tool to import
> > those shapes.
> > Just my 2 cents.
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Glenn Plas]

In my experience, the outlines and building shapes I've seen in GRB are
like 10 times better than all the work that exists using bing and other
sources.

A one on one copy would be silly, but if you bring it all together,
agiv/grb and osm data, it helps to make sense of what you are looking
at. Also it is conclusive usually when new buildings replace older.
It's the best source, I don't really care if the house isn't exactly as-is.

The housenumber inports will take years, but it's fine as it is as tons
of intelligent choices and conclusions, mistakes and other uglynes needs
to be fixed too. And it all helps, if you overlay them with some
transparacy adding GRB would be an awesome tool.

I've been doing housenumer entries for weeks now, grb layer would
defenitely be of good help.  But never a dumb copy.

Glenn

On 05-01-15 15:05, Gilbert Hersschens wrote:
> Guys,
> 
> Don't get overly exited about the building shapes. The quality of those
> shapes is quite variable. For free standing houses they are OK - in some
> cases even excellent, but for urban areas they are not very useful,
> certainly not as a source for import. I have been using those shapes for
> quite a while for comparison in cases where severe projection distortion
> and strong shadows gave me a hard time to figure out the shape of a
> particular building and in many cases the shapes in GRB were not better
> or even worse than my own "guesstimation".
> They're OK for "second opinions" but I would never use a tool to import
> those shapes.
> Just my 2 cents.

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Gilbert Hersschens]

Guys,

Don't get overly exited about the building shapes. The quality of those
shapes is quite variable. For free standing houses they are OK - in some
cases even excellent, but for urban areas they are not very useful,
certainly not as a source for import. I have been using those shapes for
quite a while for comparison in cases where severe projection distortion
and strong shadows gave me a hard time to figure out the shape of a
particular building and in many cases the shapes in GRB were not better or
even worse than my own "guesstimation".
They're OK for "second opinions" but I would never use a tool to import
those shapes.
Just my 2 cents.

BTW, there are many other items in GRB besides the building shapes which
are very helpful: shapes of administrative plots, railways (including
disused tracks), streetnames, waterways, etc..).
GRB also contains house numbers, but I prefer to use the CRAB WMS for that (
http://geo.agiv.be/inspire/wms/Adressen?). I've had a few cases where the
CRAB numbers were different from those in GRB. After consulting with the
local GIS administrator in all cases CRAB was right and GRB was wrong. It
seems that CRAB and GRB are still not completely in sync...

Gilbert

On 5 January 2015 at 14:14, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> In the worst case, we could try to do something with the Tracer2 plugin
> for JOSM
> See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Tracer2
>
> regards
>
> m
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jo  wrote:
>
>> That is indeed great news! Does it mean we'll be able to use the building
>> outlines/contours as well then, in the foreseeable future? And, if so,
>> would they be available as vectors/shape files, like in the UrbIS dataset?
>> Or am I mistaken and is that in CRAB and not in GRB?
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> 2015-01-05 12:03 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas :
>>
>>> Thanks Jan for keeping us in the loop.  This is awesome news.
>>>
>>> Glenn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05-01-15 11:08, Jan Laporte wrote:
>>> > GRB currently is in the process of becoming open data. The agreement is
>>> > signed and official. Only the GRB-decree needs to be edited now before
>>> > it effectively is open data. I can unfortunately not give a timing for
>>> that.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > In any case, it’ll be allowed quite soon.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > cheers
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > *From:*André Pirard [mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com]
>>> > *Sent:* donderdag 1 januari 2015 17:49
>>> > *To:* OpenStreetMap Belgium
>>> > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now
>>> > conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :
>>> >
>>> > The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct'
>>> using
>>> >
>>> > Bing, and we all know where that leads to...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
>>> >
>>> > frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have
>>> added
>>> >
>>> > all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
>>> >
>>> > properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious
>>> user.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Marc Gemis]

In the worst case, we could try to do something with the Tracer2 plugin for
JOSM
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Tracer2

regards

m

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Jo  wrote:

> That is indeed great news! Does it mean we'll be able to use the building
> outlines/contours as well then, in the foreseeable future? And, if so,
> would they be available as vectors/shape files, like in the UrbIS dataset?
> Or am I mistaken and is that in CRAB and not in GRB?
>
> Jo
>
> 2015-01-05 12:03 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas :
>
>> Thanks Jan for keeping us in the loop.  This is awesome news.
>>
>> Glenn
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05-01-15 11:08, Jan Laporte wrote:
>> > GRB currently is in the process of becoming open data. The agreement is
>> > signed and official. Only the GRB-decree needs to be edited now before
>> > it effectively is open data. I can unfortunately not give a timing for
>> that.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > In any case, it’ll be allowed quite soon.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > cheers
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > *From:*André Pirard [mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com]
>> > *Sent:* donderdag 1 januari 2015 17:49
>> > *To:* OpenStreetMap Belgium
>> > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now
>> > conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :
>> >
>> > The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct'
>> using
>> >
>> > Bing, and we all know where that leads to...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
>> >
>> > frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have
>> added
>> >
>> > all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
>> >
>> > properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious
>> user.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Jo]

That is indeed great news! Does it mean we'll be able to use the building
outlines/contours as well then, in the foreseeable future? And, if so,
would they be available as vectors/shape files, like in the UrbIS dataset?
Or am I mistaken and is that in CRAB and not in GRB?

Jo

2015-01-05 12:03 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas :

> Thanks Jan for keeping us in the loop.  This is awesome news.
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
> On 05-01-15 11:08, Jan Laporte wrote:
> > GRB currently is in the process of becoming open data. The agreement is
> > signed and official. Only the GRB-decree needs to be edited now before
> > it effectively is open data. I can unfortunately not give a timing for
> that.
> >
> >
> >
> > In any case, it’ll be allowed quite soon.
> >
> >
> >
> > cheers
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*André Pirard [mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com]
> > *Sent:* donderdag 1 januari 2015 17:49
> > *To:* OpenStreetMap Belgium
> > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now
> > conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :
> >
> > The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct'
> using
> >
> > Bing, and we all know where that leads to...
> >
> >
> >
> > We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
> >
> > frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added
> >
> > all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
> >
> > properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious
> user.
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Glenn Plas]

Thanks Jan for keeping us in the loop.  This is awesome news.

Glenn



On 05-01-15 11:08, Jan Laporte wrote:
> GRB currently is in the process of becoming open data. The agreement is
> signed and official. Only the GRB-decree needs to be edited now before
> it effectively is open data. I can unfortunately not give a timing for that.
> 
>  
> 
> In any case, it’ll be allowed quite soon.
> 
>  
> 
> cheers
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*André Pirard [mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* donderdag 1 januari 2015 17:49
> *To:* OpenStreetMap Belgium
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now
> conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM
> 
>  
> 
> On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :
> 
> The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct' using
> 
> Bing, and we all know where that leads to...
> 
>  
> 
> We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
> 
> frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added
> 
> all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
> 
> properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious user.

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Jan Laporte]

GRB currently is in the process of becoming open data. The agreement is signed 
and official. Only the GRB-decree needs to be edited now before it effectively 
is open data. I can unfortunately not give a timing for that.

In any case, it’ll be allowed quite soon.

cheers


From: André Pirard [mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com]
Sent: donderdag 1 januari 2015 17:49
To: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now 
conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :

The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct' using

Bing, and we all know where that leads to...



We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly

frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added

all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed

properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious user.
If I understand well, GRB is the digitalized map and it is not allowed.
Belgium is a strange country.
In the north, they're able but not allowed to use it.
In the south, they are allowed to use it but unable to (no WMS 4326).
We should focus on adding to SPW Arcgis the few configuration lines I've shown.
That's all there is to it unless the Arcgis doc is deceiving.

Cheers
André.




There is no such thing as security by obscurity.  At the very least,

give them the option.



Glenn







On 28-12-14 22:59, Jo wrote:

It's possible to have people sign an EULA. Would that help? I'd need to

know what the restrictions are though. I thought we were just not

supposed to copy their building outlines. I guess the parcel outlines

are off limits as well, but I don't see those with the paramters I provided.



I'd love to support iD as well, but why can't they program support for

WMS? Why can't  they be as flexible as possible? It's absurd that we'd

have to setup a server to convert from WMS to TMS or have iD users use

older imagery than the enlightened users of JOSM. It almost seems easier

to try and peel people away from the 'dark side'.



Jo



2014-12-28 21:50 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere 
mailto:sander...@gmail.com>

<mailto:sander...@gmail.com><mailto:sander...@gmail.com>>:



Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default

layer set. It becomes too dangerous people will use it without

reading about the limitations.






AGIV e-mail disclaimer: http://www.agiv.be/gis/organisatie/?artid=355
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[André Pirard]

  
  
On 2015-01-01 16:19, Glenn Plas wrote :


  The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct' using
Bing, and we all know where that leads to...

We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added
all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious user.

If I understand well, GRB is the digitalized map and it is not
allowed.
Belgium is a strange country.
In the north, they're able but not allowed to use it.
In the south, they are allowed to use it but unable to (no WMS
4326).
We should focus on adding to SPW Arcgis the few configuration lines
I've shown. 
That's all there is to it unless the Arcgis doc is deceiving.

Cheers



  

  André.

  



  There is no such thing as security by obscurity.  At the very least,
give them the option.

Glenn



On 28-12-14 22:59, Jo wrote:

  
It's possible to have people sign an EULA. Would that help? I'd need to
know what the restrictions are though. I thought we were just not
supposed to copy their building outlines. I guess the parcel outlines
are off limits as well, but I don't see those with the paramters I provided.

I'd love to support iD as well, but why can't they program support for
WMS? Why can't  they be as flexible as possible? It's absurd that we'd
have to setup a server to convert from WMS to TMS or have iD users use
older imagery than the enlightened users of JOSM. It almost seems easier
to try and peel people away from the 'dark side'.

Jo

2014-12-28 21:50 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere :

Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default
layer set. It becomes too dangerous people will use it without
reading about the limitations.


  


  


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Sander Deryckere]

I just read a blog post about Mapbox updating aerial imagery in German
cities from governmental sources, and I mailed them to ask if they'd want
to use Agiv for Flanders too

https://www.mapbox.com/blog/berlin-imagery-update/

If they want to do it, newbies using iD could just use the Agiv imagery in
their editor (it's even in the default menu, so some little comparison
effort would show them that it's better).

If someone knows how to best contact Bing, it might be worth to ask Bing
the same. Since the Agiv images are released under the Open Data license,
it's perfectly possible to use them directly in a commercial app.

Regards,
Sander

2015-01-01 16:19 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas :

> The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct' using
> Bing, and we all know where that leads to...
>
> We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
> frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added
> all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
> properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious user.
>
> There is no such thing as security by obscurity.  At the very least,
> give them the option.
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
> On 28-12-14 22:59, Jo wrote:
> > It's possible to have people sign an EULA. Would that help? I'd need to
> > know what the restrictions are though. I thought we were just not
> > supposed to copy their building outlines. I guess the parcel outlines
> > are off limits as well, but I don't see those with the paramters I
> provided.
> >
> > I'd love to support iD as well, but why can't they program support for
> > WMS? Why can't  they be as flexible as possible? It's absurd that we'd
> > have to setup a server to convert from WMS to TMS or have iD users use
> > older imagery than the enlightened users of JOSM. It almost seems easier
> > to try and peel people away from the 'dark side'.
> >
> > Jo
> >
> > 2014-12-28 21:50 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere  > >:
> >
> > Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default
> > layer set. It becomes too dangerous people will use it without
> > reading about the limitations.
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Glenn Plas]

The danger in not adding GRB layer is that people will 'correct' using
Bing, and we all know where that leads to...

We should focus on efforts in getting GRB to open up.  I'm terribly
frustrated by people deleting buildings using Bing while I have added
all new buildings using Agiv, doublechecked using GRB and addressed
properly only to find out that the get deleted by some oblivious user.

There is no such thing as security by obscurity.  At the very least,
give them the option.

Glenn



On 28-12-14 22:59, Jo wrote:
> It's possible to have people sign an EULA. Would that help? I'd need to
> know what the restrictions are though. I thought we were just not
> supposed to copy their building outlines. I guess the parcel outlines
> are off limits as well, but I don't see those with the paramters I provided.
> 
> I'd love to support iD as well, but why can't they program support for
> WMS? Why can't  they be as flexible as possible? It's absurd that we'd
> have to setup a server to convert from WMS to TMS or have iD users use
> older imagery than the enlightened users of JOSM. It almost seems easier
> to try and peel people away from the 'dark side'.
> 
> Jo
> 
> 2014-12-28 21:50 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere  >:
> 
> Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default
> layer set. It becomes too dangerous people will use it without
> reading about the limitations.

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[André Pirard]

On 2014-12-29 17:33, André Pirard wrote :
> I created:
> *SPW(allon) 2012 aerial imagery**
> **SPW(allon) 2009 aerial imagery***
I forgot to add that these photographs may have a perspective effect.
For example, a wall of a house may be visible so that the roof is offset.
In one place I checked thoroughly, 2012 2-floor (1) houses are slanted
1.5 m in one direction and 2009 is slanted the same in the opposite
direction.  That means that the exact position of the house is the
bottom of the wall at ground level and that the roofs are offset by that
value. Of course, the wall and offset are visible only at the end of a
row and the offset must be evaluated all along.
All in all, precise tagging is tricky.
Digitalized maps are corrected, so that a gentle way to use them is to
evaluate the offset of the photo and to continue mapping with that photo.

Cheers

André.


(1) Belgian, not American floors
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[André Pirard]

  
  
On 2014-12-28 22:55, Jo wrote :
  
2014-12-28 21:39 GMT+01:00 André Pirard
  :
  

  On 2014-12-28 18:30, Jo wrote :
  
  

  

  
This is long overdue, but I finally got
  round to it. I added a page
  
  https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/Belgium
  
  with WMS sources for Belgium, for which we
  have permission to use.
  
  So now there are 3 more entries on this page:
  
  https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps
  

The resolutions are all better than Bing. They
are also more recent.

  
  Is there somebody who knows a convenient way to
  add those coordinates, so a shape is shown?
  
  AGIV also has coverage for Brussels, The Walloon
  imagery also covers the German speaking part of
  Belgium.

  

   Well done, Jo.  The only thing to do is now:
  JOSM>Imagery>Imagery Preferences[]>Available...>select
  BE...>Activate
  
  
  
  
  Indeed, you have to refresh your list of Imagery in JOSM
to see that these are available now.
  
  


  
I don't know much about projections, but
  EPSG:4326 seems to work just fine for all three.

  

   Projections are simple: a mathematical
  transformation of the Earth surface to draw it on a plane
  (screen).
  EPSG:4326 uses the GPS coordinates (degrees) linearly (d °
  NS/EW = c cm  vertically/horizontally).
  Cylindrical is the projection as if by light beams
  perpendicular to the Earth axis.
  Mercator is the same but with a vertical correction so
  that the polar regions are not flattened.
  These 3 are quickly transformed one to another with little
  CPU.
  Hence, JOSM, which normally uses Mercator on screen, can
  convert any to its screen projection.
  
  The (Belgian) cartographers use Lambert projections which
  is similar to cylindrical, but on a cone that is tangent
  to a line going across their country (Belgium).  This is
  so that the proportions of the distances are the same
  vertically and horizontally. The Belgian servers serve
  them too.  In addition to EPSG:4326.  Except SPW (
  ;-) ).
  
  

  

Thank you. I still don't fully understand, I
  merely grasp the concept somewhat... I don't believe I'll ever
  call them 'simple' though.

Maybe the SPW too?  ;-) 
One needs pictures.  This, maybe   (jgetoppositelng();  Dutch
available (opposite???!!!))
http://www.ngi.be/FR/FR2-1-4.shtm
http://www.ngi.be/FR/FR2-1-7.shtm
http://www.ngi.be/FR/FR2-1-6.shtm
Wikipedia

  

  



  
  

  Feel free to improve/extend that wiki page,
if you can.
  

  
 I would add Wallonia 2009.  It is sometimes
useful (e.g. to get rid of trees).
Is it just a matter of editing the file?  Have to
refresh the server?
  



You edit the wiki page, the rest is done behind the
  scenes. I guess everybody has to refresh their list of
  imagery to see that somebody changed the page.

  

  


I did, but I don't understand why someone renamed the 2012 map to
2009 at the same time !!!

I created:
SPW(allon) 2012 aerial imagery
SPW(allon) 2009 aerial imagery
(so that the essential appears in the short space in the JOSM
list).

I corrected the bounds (values changed and minlat/maxlat were
inverted)
I set the format to jpeg instead of bmp (less cache memory for a
trifle more CPU).

Please check if it's OK with you before I

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Jo]

It's possible to have people sign an EULA. Would that help? I'd need to
know what the restrictions are though. I thought we were just not supposed
to copy their building outlines. I guess the parcel outlines are off limits
as well, but I don't see those with the paramters I provided.

I'd love to support iD as well, but why can't they program support for WMS?
Why can't  they be as flexible as possible? It's absurd that we'd have to
setup a server to convert from WMS to TMS or have iD users use older
imagery than the enlightened users of JOSM. It almost seems easier to try
and peel people away from the 'dark side'.

Jo

2014-12-28 21:50 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere :

> Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default layer
> set. It becomes too dangerous people will use it without reading about the
> limitations.
>
> But anyway, thanks for working on it.
>
> Otoh, supporting iD is also important. We can't say "Don't trace from
> Bing" if people can't use Agiv in iD. For that, we would need a TMS. So
> that either means setting up a map proxy to convert WMS from Agiv to TMS,
> or finding some TMS layer available (there are TMS layers for older imagery
> from Agiv, but I've found none for the most recent imagery). Then, it needs
> to be added to this repo: https://github.com/osmlab/editor-imagery-index
>
> But I'm not experienced enough with imagery to accomplish this.
>
> Jo, are you, or is there anyone else wanting to look at this? I think it
> would save us a lot of problems.
>
> Regards,
> Sander
>
> 2014-12-28 21:39 GMT+01:00 André Pirard :
>
>>  On 2014-12-28 18:30, Jo wrote :
>>
>>   This is long overdue, but I finally got round to it. I added a page
>>
>> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/Belgium
>>
>> with WMS sources for Belgium, for which we have permission to use.
>>
>> So now there are 3 more entries on this page:
>>
>> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps
>>
>>  The resolutions are all better than Bing. They are also more recent.
>>
>>  Is there somebody who knows a convenient way to add those coordinates,
>> so a shape is shown?
>>
>> AGIV also has coverage for Brussels, The Walloon imagery also covers the
>> German speaking part of Belgium.
>>
>> Well done, Jo.  The only thing to do is now:
>> JOSM>Imagery>Imagery Preferences[]>Available...>select BE...>Activate
>>
>>  I don't know much about projections, but EPSG:4326 seems to work just
>> fine for all three.
>>
>> Projections are simple: a mathematical transformation of the Earth
>> surface to draw it on a plane (screen).
>> EPSG:4326 uses the GPS coordinates (degrees) linearly (d ° NS/EW = c cm
>> vertically/horizontally).
>> Cylindrical is the projection as if by light beams perpendicular to the
>> Earth axis.
>> Mercator is the same but with a vertical correction so that the polar
>> regions are not flattened.
>> These 3 are quickly transformed one to another with little CPU.
>> Hence, JOSM, which normally uses Mercator on screen, can convert any to
>> its screen projection.
>>
>> The (Belgian) cartographers use Lambert projections which is similar to
>> cylindrical, but on a cone that is tangent to a line going across their
>> country (Belgium).  This is so that the proportions of the distances are
>> the same vertically and horizontally. The Belgian servers serve them too.
>> In addition to EPSG:4326.  Except SPW ( ;-) ).
>>
>>  Feel free to improve/extend that wiki page, if you can.
>>
>> I would add Wallonia 2009.  It is sometimes useful (e.g. to get rid of
>> trees).
>> Is it just a matter of editing the file?  Have to refresh the server?
>> Can id=SPW be the same or what should be used?
>>
>> What is that (3.xx) after the name JOSM displays? Any way to get rid
>> of it?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>   André.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[Sander Deryckere]

Jo, I'm not sure that the GRB layer should be part of the default layer
set. It becomes too dangerous people will use it without reading about the
limitations.

But anyway, thanks for working on it.

Otoh, supporting iD is also important. We can't say "Don't trace from Bing"
if people can't use Agiv in iD. For that, we would need a TMS. So that
either means setting up a map proxy to convert WMS from Agiv to TMS, or
finding some TMS layer available (there are TMS layers for older imagery
from Agiv, but I've found none for the most recent imagery). Then, it needs
to be added to this repo: https://github.com/osmlab/editor-imagery-index

But I'm not experienced enough with imagery to accomplish this.

Jo, are you, or is there anyone else wanting to look at this? I think it
would save us a lot of problems.

Regards,
Sander

2014-12-28 21:39 GMT+01:00 André Pirard :

>  On 2014-12-28 18:30, Jo wrote :
>
>   This is long overdue, but I finally got round to it. I added a page
>
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/Belgium
>
> with WMS sources for Belgium, for which we have permission to use.
>
> So now there are 3 more entries on this page:
>
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps
>
>  The resolutions are all better than Bing. They are also more recent.
>
>  Is there somebody who knows a convenient way to add those coordinates, so
> a shape is shown?
>
> AGIV also has coverage for Brussels, The Walloon imagery also covers the
> German speaking part of Belgium.
>
> Well done, Jo.  The only thing to do is now:
> JOSM>Imagery>Imagery Preferences[]>Available...>select BE...>Activate
>
>  I don't know much about projections, but EPSG:4326 seems to work just
> fine for all three.
>
> Projections are simple: a mathematical transformation of the Earth surface
> to draw it on a plane (screen).
> EPSG:4326 uses the GPS coordinates (degrees) linearly (d ° NS/EW = c cm
> vertically/horizontally).
> Cylindrical is the projection as if by light beams perpendicular to the
> Earth axis.
> Mercator is the same but with a vertical correction so that the polar
> regions are not flattened.
> These 3 are quickly transformed one to another with little CPU.
> Hence, JOSM, which normally uses Mercator on screen, can convert any to
> its screen projection.
>
> The (Belgian) cartographers use Lambert projections which is similar to
> cylindrical, but on a cone that is tangent to a line going across their
> country (Belgium).  This is so that the proportions of the distances are
> the same vertically and horizontally. The Belgian servers serve them too.
> In addition to EPSG:4326.  Except SPW ( ;-) ).
>
>  Feel free to improve/extend that wiki page, if you can.
>
> I would add Wallonia 2009.  It is sometimes useful (e.g. to get rid of
> trees).
> Is it just a matter of editing the file?  Have to refresh the server?
> Can id=SPW be the same or what should be used?
>
> What is that (3.xx) after the name JOSM displays? Any way to get rid
> of it?
>
> Cheers
>
>   André.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] WMS (aerial) imagery covering Belgium, now conveniently packaged for adding it to JOSM

[André Pirard]

  
  
On 2014-12-28 18:30, Jo wrote :


  

  
This is long overdue, but I finally got round to it. I
  added a page
  
  https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/Belgium
  
  with WMS sources for Belgium, for which we have permission
  to use.
  
  So now there are 3 more entries on this page:
  
  https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps
  

The resolutions are all better than Bing. They are also more
recent.

  
  Is there somebody who knows a convenient way to add those
  coordinates, so a shape is shown?
  
  AGIV also has coverage for Brussels, The Walloon imagery also
  covers the German speaking part of Belgium.

  

Well done, Jo.  The only thing to do is now:
JOSM>Imagery>Imagery Preferences[]>Available...>select
BE...>Activate

  
I don't know much about projections, but EPSG:4326 seems to
  work just fine for all three.

  

Projections are simple: a mathematical transformation of the Earth
surface to draw it on a plane (screen).
EPSG:4326 uses the GPS coordinates (degrees) linearly (d ° NS/EW = c
cm  vertically/horizontally).
Cylindrical is the projection as if by light beams perpendicular to
the Earth axis.
Mercator is the same but with a vertical correction so that the
polar regions are not flattened.
These 3 are quickly transformed one to another with little CPU.
Hence, JOSM, which normally uses Mercator on screen, can convert any
to its screen projection.

The (Belgian) cartographers use Lambert projections which is similar
to cylindrical, but on a cone that is tangent to a line going across
their country (Belgium).  This is so that the proportions of the
distances are the same vertically and horizontally. The Belgian
servers serve them too.  In addition to EPSG:4326.  Except SPW ( ;-) ).

  
Feel free to improve/extend that wiki page, if you can.

  

I would add Wallonia 2009.  It is sometimes useful (e.g. to get rid
of trees).
Is it just a matter of editing the file?  Have to refresh the
server?
Can id=SPW be the same or what should be used?

What is that (3.xx) after the name JOSM displays? Any way to get
rid of it?

Cheers



  

  André.

  



  


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be