Re: [Talk-ca] Import of large features in Canvec
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Frank Steggink wrote: > Hi all, > > Today I have (finally) worked on large features in Canvec data (forests, > water, etc.), and I have come up with a method how to deal with them. Bravo! Looks great. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Import of large features in Canvec
Hi all, Today I have (finally) worked on large features in Canvec data (forests, water, etc.), and I have come up with a method how to deal with them. This currently involves PostGIS, but maybe I'll use GEOS or another method, so that it isn't necessary to load data in a DB. More details will follow soon, since I need to clean up code / sort out things a bit, and eventually integrate it into the canvec_to_osm.py script. Right now I've uploaded (only) wooded areas in the Charlevoix region in Quebec. This already makes the map look entirely different! The result can be found here [1]. Changesets: [2] and [3]. You'll see faint horizontal and vertical lines crisscrossing the area. This is an artifact of making the features smaller (0.1 x 0.05 degrees). This will be dealt with with the "gamma" option which is part of the new Mapnik 0.7.0 release. This will probably be used in a couple of weeks on osm.org. See [4] for more info. Cheers, Frank [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=47.625&lon=-70.25&zoom=11&layers=B000FTFT [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/3707953 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/3708062 [4] http://trac.mapnik.org/wiki/PolygonSymbolizer ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Administrative boundaries Quebec
Nicolas Gignac wrote: > Yeah, I know, but as an overlays it is still showing what it can be > integrated into OSM, it is a good start!!! > What is your strategy to clear legal details? > If you need help stay in touch with me, because I am working in the > government of Quebec and I know really well the people at the > Ministère des Ressources Naturelles du Québec. > I will send them the link of Frank this week and explain to them the > possibility it can bring to free some of their data. > > Cheers, > > Nicolas Hi Nicolas, There is not really a strategy, only that you can ask them if they agree that their data is contributed to OpenStreetMap, under the CC-BY-SA license. See [1] and [2] for more details. Since the use of the Open Database License (ODbL) is under way for quite a while now, and a decision should be taken quite soon, it would also be good to check if they agree that the ODbL will be applied on their data in the future. It is also strongly recommended to get the eventual agreement in writing. That doesn't need to be a paper letter, but can also by e-mail. The import will be done under a separate account, so in case any problems might arise, this data can be removed without too much trouble. Since you're working for the government of Quebec, you likely know the best which person(s) / department(s) to contact. In case they would like to see examples, you can refer to the Geobase / Canvec import. Furthermore, [3] lists a lot of examples of imports. Regards, and thanks in advance for picking this up, Frank [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Administrative boundaries Quebec
Yeah, I know, but as an overlays it is still showing what it can be integrated into OSM, it is a good start!!! What is your strategy to clear legal details? If you need help stay in touch with me, because I am working in the government of Quebec and I know really well the people at the Ministère des Ressources Naturelles du Québec. I will send them the link of Frank this week and explain to them the possibility it can bring to free some of their data. Cheers, Nicolas 2010/1/23 Pierre-Luc Beaudoin > On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 16:18 -0500, Nicolas Gignac wrote: > > they will happy to know that some of their data has been used in OSM! > > They might think of freeing other datasets... > > Note that this data is NOT part of OSM (yet)! it's only an overlay of > the data over OSM. It hasn't been incorporated into the OSM database > until all legal details have been cleared :) > ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] NHN and one way rivers
Sorry if this message shows up twice; I tried to send with the wrong email address and the list server got unhappy. I can't cancel the first message but it isn't showing up either. I was looking at the waterways imported from the Geobase NHN NLFlow layer and they are all tagged as oneway. As I understand it, that implies a legal restriction on the direction of traffic, and I'm pretty sure you can paddle a canoe upstream without incurring the wrath of the canoe police. There's also a rather vague 'type' attribute. My understanding of the TYPE column in the NLFlow layer is that a better name for this attribute might be 'source:flow' as it seems to describe how the flow direction was determined (Though I may be misunderstanding the docs) -- Kevin Michael Smith signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Regional trail progress & Quality & trust on OpenStreetMap
Right, thanks John :)
The other thing i forgot to add was that we try to encourage people to
add the "source=*" tag, this helps in decision making.
And yet another thing, because both the CanVec & LIO source data
contains the 'source:date=*' field, this should really be added, as
it varies greatly across the datasets. (source:date by regular users
isnt needed because its part of the changeset)
It was sugested to only list the ones older than 20 years... However,
keeping consistancy & having the ability to instantly 'judge the
quality' really helps. (the main OSM database is already 3 years old,
and the 'things on the ground' has already changed.
So in sum, every map user (regardless of the medium shown) has the
chance to actually contribute back to the map)
~all trails are defined by the users who follow the tracks (literally)
Sam
On 1/24/10, john whelan wrote:
> Within the community there are different opinions about data quality
> which appears to vary according to the source. The type of GPS and
> how its configured, the weather, and in the case of satellite tracing
> how accurate it was. Also where two sources are combined if the more
> accurate is overwritten by the less accurate one then junctions etc
> can be lost.
>
> The nice thing about the OSM approach is that as the maps get more
> input so they become more accurate over time and get more information
> added.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> 2010/1/24 Sam Vekemans :
>> Hi Patrick et all,
>> re: data quaility & accuracy & trust
>>
>> Its great to now see more trails being mapped out :)
>> It looks like as soon as the NRCan canvec data is sorted out, it will
>> be available to import.
>> We (the OSM community) are not in any rush to get the data imported,
>> this is because we know the data is from mixed sources, and more often
>> that not, its dated.
>> So it requires being re-navigated physically, to check what the
>> current conditions of the trails are.
>>
>> The data (in the OSM database) is technically accurate, because the
>> contributors can be easily contacted, to find out what the trails are
>> like, and the method used to collect the data.
>> So if anyone questions the quality, they are welcome to re-survay the
>> area themselves, of find out if someone they trust more, will be
>> navigating the trails. (which is another reason we have ('mapping
>> parties')
>>
>> The OSM community works on trust. Trust that EVERYONE working on the
>> map, is doing so, to make the map the most accurate & uptodate as
>> possable, using the best available source (that was donated, or
>> public) domain, or permission granted to use the data.)
>>
>> Its always an interesting discussion, because traditionally, its the
>> 'paid cartographers' who are the only ones who are 'certified GIS
>> professionals', but now. The data that was heald in a vault
>> (copyright) can be used, with hand-held GPSs and Satelite imagery, can
>> make maps that dont get out of date, and is constantly changing based
>> on the conditions on the ground.
>>
>> Leveraging the community, and OpenSource collaboration, we make a GIS
>> product that is accurate to the level that contributors and the
>> community wants to make it.
>>
>> So for trail mapping, OSM is much more detailed than we need :)
>>
>> hope that answers your question.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Sam
>> --
>> Twitter: @Acrosscanada
>> Blog: http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
>> Skype: samvekemans
>> OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
>> @Acrosscanadatrails
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>
--
Twitter: @Acrosscanada
Blog: http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
Skype: samvekemans
OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
@Acrosscanadatrails
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Regional trail progress & Quality & trust on OpenStreetMap
Within the community there are different opinions about data quality
which appears to vary according to the source. The type of GPS and
how its configured, the weather, and in the case of satellite tracing
how accurate it was. Also where two sources are combined if the more
accurate is overwritten by the less accurate one then junctions etc
can be lost.
The nice thing about the OSM approach is that as the maps get more
input so they become more accurate over time and get more information
added.
Cheerio John
2010/1/24 Sam Vekemans :
> Hi Patrick et all,
> re: data quaility & accuracy & trust
>
> Its great to now see more trails being mapped out :)
> It looks like as soon as the NRCan canvec data is sorted out, it will
> be available to import.
> We (the OSM community) are not in any rush to get the data imported,
> this is because we know the data is from mixed sources, and more often
> that not, its dated.
> So it requires being re-navigated physically, to check what the
> current conditions of the trails are.
>
> The data (in the OSM database) is technically accurate, because the
> contributors can be easily contacted, to find out what the trails are
> like, and the method used to collect the data.
> So if anyone questions the quality, they are welcome to re-survay the
> area themselves, of find out if someone they trust more, will be
> navigating the trails. (which is another reason we have ('mapping
> parties')
>
> The OSM community works on trust. Trust that EVERYONE working on the
> map, is doing so, to make the map the most accurate & uptodate as
> possable, using the best available source (that was donated, or
> public) domain, or permission granted to use the data.)
>
> Its always an interesting discussion, because traditionally, its the
> 'paid cartographers' who are the only ones who are 'certified GIS
> professionals', but now. The data that was heald in a vault
> (copyright) can be used, with hand-held GPSs and Satelite imagery, can
> make maps that dont get out of date, and is constantly changing based
> on the conditions on the ground.
>
> Leveraging the community, and OpenSource collaboration, we make a GIS
> product that is accurate to the level that contributors and the
> community wants to make it.
>
> So for trail mapping, OSM is much more detailed than we need :)
>
> hope that answers your question.
>
> cheers,
> Sam
> --
> Twitter: @Acrosscanada
> Blog: http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
> Skype: samvekemans
> OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
> @Acrosscanadatrails
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
