Re: [Talk-ca] Lake Simcoe - two versions?
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Frank Steggink wrote: > The Canvec version is clearly better, so the lowres version can be deleted. Ok, I've deleted the low-res version, including nodes that weren't part of anything else. Thanks for the help. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8297098 -- AJ Ashton ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Lake Simcoe - two versions?
Barrie area was probably my import before we had OSM files from CanVec. Can't remember. I think the duplicate is because at the time I couldn't get an answer on what to do with the coastline. But since the lake is self contained it can probably be deleted. Michael On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Frank Steggink wrote: > On 11-05-30 09:15 PM, Me (Gmail) wrote: > >> I've been working on improving the Barrie, Ontario area, and I'm >> trying to figure out what is going on with/what to do about Lake >> Simcoe. >> >> There are multiple CanVec-imported ways that together make up a fairly >> detailed, accurate representation of the lake. A single low-detail way >> [1] is overlapping these, and obscures the accurate detail in many >> places when rendered [2]. >> >> [1]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4997263 >> [2]: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2398828/lake-simcoe-josm.png >> >> Not having much experience dealing with large or tiled objects in OSM, >> my question is if the low-resolution object is serving a purpose, and >> whether I should bother editing it so as to not overlap with the >> high-detail version, or whether it can just be deleted. >> >> Hi AJ, > > The Canvec version is clearly better, so the lowres version can be deleted. > It was probably one of the features being traced when only Landsat imagery > was available. In my opinion this cleaning up should have been done during > the import of the Canvec sheet. Otherwise this import gets more > characteristics of a "bad import" (by leaving duplicate features), which we > should prevent. (Note that there are also some people who think that user > traced features are always better than imported features, but in this case > the difference is evident, and nobody has bothered yet to trace the > shoreline from the Bing imagery.) > > What might have caused this is that Lake Simcoe overlaps several sheets, so > it can't be deleted at once. Wat I usually do is to cut the part of the > coastline which is overlapping the sheet being imported, and connect the > existing coastline to the new one. An example of this can be seen in the > southeast part of Lac Saint-Jean in Québec: [1]. This is also how I've dealt > with the Saguenay river, and also with the St. Lawrence coastline. This can > best be done asap, because you never know for sure when you continue with > the rest. It is a bit more work, but in my opinion it's much better than > confusing or even annoying others. > > Frank > > [1] http://osm.org/go/cLD8wZR-- > > > ___ > 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
Re: [Talk-ca] Lake Simcoe - two versions?
On 11-05-30 09:15 PM, Me (Gmail) wrote: I've been working on improving the Barrie, Ontario area, and I'm trying to figure out what is going on with/what to do about Lake Simcoe. There are multiple CanVec-imported ways that together make up a fairly detailed, accurate representation of the lake. A single low-detail way [1] is overlapping these, and obscures the accurate detail in many places when rendered [2]. [1]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4997263 [2]: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2398828/lake-simcoe-josm.png Not having much experience dealing with large or tiled objects in OSM, my question is if the low-resolution object is serving a purpose, and whether I should bother editing it so as to not overlap with the high-detail version, or whether it can just be deleted. Hi AJ, The Canvec version is clearly better, so the lowres version can be deleted. It was probably one of the features being traced when only Landsat imagery was available. In my opinion this cleaning up should have been done during the import of the Canvec sheet. Otherwise this import gets more characteristics of a "bad import" (by leaving duplicate features), which we should prevent. (Note that there are also some people who think that user traced features are always better than imported features, but in this case the difference is evident, and nobody has bothered yet to trace the shoreline from the Bing imagery.) What might have caused this is that Lake Simcoe overlaps several sheets, so it can't be deleted at once. Wat I usually do is to cut the part of the coastline which is overlapping the sheet being imported, and connect the existing coastline to the new one. An example of this can be seen in the southeast part of Lac Saint-Jean in Québec: [1]. This is also how I've dealt with the Saguenay river, and also with the St. Lawrence coastline. This can best be done asap, because you never know for sure when you continue with the rest. It is a bit more work, but in my opinion it's much better than confusing or even annoying others. Frank [1] http://osm.org/go/cLD8wZR-- ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Lake Simcoe - two versions?
I've been working on improving the Barrie, Ontario area, and I'm trying to figure out what is going on with/what to do about Lake Simcoe. There are multiple CanVec-imported ways that together make up a fairly detailed, accurate representation of the lake. A single low-detail way [1] is overlapping these, and obscures the accurate detail in many places when rendered [2]. [1]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4997263 [2]: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2398828/lake-simcoe-josm.png Not having much experience dealing with large or tiled objects in OSM, my question is if the low-resolution object is serving a purpose, and whether I should bother editing it so as to not overlap with the high-detail version, or whether it can just be deleted. -- AJ Ashton ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Railways duplicated in CanVec data
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Bégin, Daniel wrote: > Bonjour Frank, > > Thank for the comments. I'll see what can be done. > > I have been assigned to some other projects. I'll try to keep in touch with > the community (as NRCan contact) but I'm not in charge of the Canvec > conversion process anymore. > > I should transfer the process to someone else but he/she has not been > identified yet. I will be there to help correcting the process using comments > I received by email and the page mentioned by Adam. This is as good a time as any to thank you, Daniel, and NRCan collectively, for participating in the OpenStreetMap community. Your participation makes the Canadian OpenStreetMap community an example to the rest of the World. Best regards, Richard ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Railways duplicated in CanVec data
Bonjour Frank, Thank for the comments. I'll see what can be done. I have been assigned to some other projects. I'll try to keep in touch with the community (as NRCan contact) but I'm not in charge of the Canvec conversion process anymore. I should transfer the process to someone else but he/she has not been identified yet. I will be there to help correcting the process using comments I received by email and the page mentioned by Adam. Cheers! Daniel -Original Message- From: Frank Steggink [mailto:stegg...@steggink.org] Sent: May 29, 2011 04:18 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Railways duplicated in CanVec data @Daniel: I finally got around to add a few more issues to the page mentioned by Adam last week. I'm not sure if you or anyone else also encountered them, but here they are: * Some roads are tagged as "highway=unclasified" (with one 's'). These are mostly linking roads, and usually have the name "Voie" (in Quebec) * Most, if not all, road names (in highways and address nodes) have multiple consecutive spaces. * Some buildings are tagged as "highway=services" (with an 's' in the end), usually service stations near motorways. * (and another thing: the JOSM validator is complaning that many water areas should be reversed) Another thing I'm missing is names on large rivers, which are added as natural=water (multi)polygons. Is there a way to get those names, or perhaps would it be possible to generate centerlines (which can be tagged with waterway=river; name=*)? I've attempted to draw a few centerlines myself, but it's very time-consuming. I also wonder if there is any sight on an improved release of the Canvec OSM product, which has improved many of the known issues of the current release. I'm also still thinking about how to deal with road names, and Canvec vs. Geobase roads in general in Quebec. It's not clear how to proceed with that, especially since the "boots on the ground" option is nearly impossible. Other than that I'm still very glad with the offerings given by the NRCan :) Frank On 11-05-29 03:10 AM, Adam Dunn wrote: > Indeed. In fact, this issue has already been listed on the wiki page: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec#CanVec_7 > :) > > Adam > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Samuel Longiaru wrote: >> I've been importing in south central BC and have noticed that there >> is a consistent duplication of railway = rail ways in the CanVec >> data. No big deal as if I forget, it is caught by the validator, but >> there must be a glitch somewhere in converting to OSM? >> >> Thanks >> ___ >> 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 > ___ 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
