[Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. You go first. :-) Best regards, Richard ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
On 12-04-15 11:09 , Richard Weait wrote: Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? Essential, required, epic and amazing. We're a huge sparsely-populated country. It would be impossible to maintain anything other that a few isolated dots across the country without imports. More! Now! Always! Yes!! Thanks to all who have provided imports. Keep it up. We have a MAP now! cheers, Stewart ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
On 2012-04-15, at 11:09 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. Generally, I don't see why we shouldn't avail ourselves of such information. As Stewart pointed put, we're a huge sparsely-populated country. However, there needs to be a system to help avoid conflicting with similar/identical data being collected by local mappers. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 11:09 -0400, Richard Weait wrote: Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. You go first. :-) Best regards, Richard ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca From what I see there are some conflicting arguments here. 1 Building a community of mappers to add features to the map. Ideally local. 2 Canada is a huge country. I doubt that there are that many people willing to commit to mapping every nook. I'm sure the amount of No Trespassing signs itself would prevent it. 3 OSM is promoting itself as a competitor to google. 4 I would suspect most mappers are not aware of the license change coming and the resulting impact. Given the size of Canada, and the few mappers we have. I my self could not and probably would not have never walked / driven on every road, trail, river, lake forest etc without some else doing an import first which I myself used a base to improve OSM. I don't see any possible way to have a map without an import to use as a base. To counter my own points, Yes, you will find some people who see a great white spot as a challenge. But looking at the changes made locally I would think most people would rather tweak an existing road or park. Andrew 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] Canadian imports: good or bad?
Bonjour, I know that I'm not totally unbiased !-) but as it is an important question, I'll add my two cents as OSM contributor... Bulk import - Canvec for instance - is helpful to fill white areas on OSM map. Not doing twice what is already available and focus on updating, or adding features, that are not available from other sources. Using it as a canvas to add upon. I have fun updating hydrography, vegetation, parks, roads and land uses in Sherbrooke, Sept-Îles and Rimouski. I would not have done the map from scratch. Best regards, Daniel -Original Message- From: Andrew Allison [mailto:andrew.alli...@teksavvy.com] Sent: April-15-12 12:19 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 11:09 -0400, Richard Weait wrote: Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. You go first. :-) Best regards, Richard ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca From what I see there are some conflicting arguments here. 1 Building a community of mappers to add features to the map. Ideally local. 2 Canada is a huge country. I doubt that there are that many people willing to commit to mapping every nook. I'm sure the amount of No Trespassing signs itself would prevent it. 3 OSM is promoting itself as a competitor to google. 4 I would suspect most mappers are not aware of the license change coming and the resulting impact. Given the size of Canada, and the few mappers we have. I my self could not and probably would not have never walked / driven on every road, trail, river, lake forest etc without some else doing an import first which I myself used a base to improve OSM. I don't see any possible way to have a map without an import to use as a base. To counter my own points, Yes, you will find some people who see a great white spot as a challenge. But looking at the changes made locally I would think most people would rather tweak an existing road or park. Andrew ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Stewart C. Russell scr...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to all who have provided imports. Keep it up. We have a MAP now! In some areas... there are still vast expanses with little to no information available in OSM. Take this area in Saskatchewan for example: http://osm.org/go/Wk7dy_x-- A pristine area, not sullied by those nasty imports, which chase away the avid OSM enthusiast looking for pristine areas of blank canvas upon which to tag their cartographic masterpiece. CanVec data is available in this area, but no one has taken up the challenge of manually verifying and vetting the process of moving data from CanVec to the OSM database. As Andrew pointed out, it is far less daunting to go in and tweak a road, add more data points to a shore line, or add a POI to an existing area than it is to be faced with an absolutely blank screen. Writer's block morphs into Cartographer's Terror. -- James VE6SRV ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
I think you have to start with the requirements and on a project the size of OpenStreetMap there are many people involved each of which have their own set of requirements. End users would like the information they require to exist, be reliable and accurate. Many people who own a GPS and a bike like to map as a hobby so imports are not important to them. Specialist groups such as those with an interest in trees like to be able to tag these items. Are we concerned about people who will use them maps? Or do we accept that there are other alternatives based on CANVEC data that meet their requirements, ie is OpenStreetMap relevant to them? One project I'm looking at combines OSM with open bus stop data that is not licensed in a way that can be used for OSM, it could just as easily be overlaid on CANVEC data. I think the big challenge is data quality, in Ottawa I found over 100 roads with the incorrect name before I cleaned it up. So step one is define the requirements. Cheerio John On 15 April 2012 11:09, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. You go first. :-) Best regards, Richard ___ 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] Canadian imports: good or bad?
Hello all, As a former resident of Saskatchewan, I vote for imports - done by a select few people who know how to do it well. I've been slowly bringing Moose Jaw on the map with help from Bing imagery, but I will never be able to accurately map all of the roads in Saskatchewan. There are over 200,000 km of roads. Most are un-mapped in OSM and will likely remain that way - not to mention the thousands of lakes in Northern Saskatchewan that aren't there. I would much rather update a map, then try to trace the entire country. Cheers, Teresa (on a different note, I now live in Germany, where imports aren't even spoken of. Lots of stuff left to map here though, even with a really active community.) On 04/15/2012 07:57 PM, Daniel Begin wrote: Bonjour, I know that I'm not totally unbiased !-) but as it is an important question, I'll add my two cents as OSM contributor... Bulk import - Canvec for instance - is helpful to fill white areas on OSM map. Not doing twice what is already available and focus on updating, or adding features, that are not available from other sources. Using it as a canvas to add upon. I have fun updating hydrography, vegetation, parks, roads and land uses in Sherbrooke, Sept-Îles and Rimouski. I would not have done the map from scratch. Best regards, Daniel -Original Message- From: Andrew Allison [mailto:andrew.alli...@teksavvy.com] Sent: April-15-12 12:19 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 11:09 -0400, Richard Weait wrote: Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. You go first. :-) Best regards, Richard ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca From what I see there are some conflicting arguments here. 1 Building a community of mappers to add features to the map. Ideally local. 2 Canada is a huge country. I doubt that there are that many people willing to commit to mapping every nook. I'm sure the amount of No Trespassing signs itself would prevent it. 3 OSM is promoting itself as a competitor to google. 4 I would suspect most mappers are not aware of the license change coming and the resulting impact. Given the size of Canada, and the few mappers we have. I my self could not and probably would not have never walked / driven on every road, trail, river, lake forest etc without some else doing an import first which I myself used a base to improve OSM. I don't see any possible way to have a map without an import to use as a base. To counter my own points, Yes, you will find some people who see a great white spot as a challenge. But looking at the changes made locally I would think most people would rather tweak an existing road or park. Andrew ___ 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] Canadian imports: good or bad?g
I just sent a message to Winnipeg Transit asking for a shapefile with every (well, almost all) addresses in Winnipeg. Given their open data policies, I think I have a good chance. The data will be better than StatsCan addresses and will allow us to make the existing map more accurate. I see OSM as providing a high quality product, imports allow us to focus on the features that make OSM unique. See http://osm.org/go/WtzVpPV, where I traced logging roads from Bing imagery, but got the base network from Canvec. In a week I'll be heading to a small village in Southern Manitoba. If it weren't for Canvec I would have to walk every street with a GPS while taking extensive notes, and then put everything together in JOSM. But Canvec data means that I can concentrate on working and not feel guilty about not mapping, but still add many features not collected by Google. Sam Dyck ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
Let start from the beginning. What is the objective of OSM? A collaborative map of the world. Not a patchwork. We need a map with sufficient quality to support various projects. And there are a lot of dynamic projects around like http://hiking.lonvia.de/en/ and http://hikebikemap.de/. See this nice nordic ski map derived from OSM : http://www.pistes-nordiques.org/ It is more developped in Europe. So Zoom-in in this area to see trails in detail. And then, pass the mouse over trails. An Elevation Profile of the trail will be proposed. A lot of similar projects are susceptible to emerge in various sectors : sport, food, local communities, organic farms, artisanal cheese makers, local producers, etc. What do they need from us? How we deliver? We surely have to tag and structure various information related to such activities. OSM is a vast project interrelated with communities, Open source developpers. The derived products of OSM need good quality map as baselayer and Bulk imports should surely be part of the portrait. Pierre De : Richard Weait Date/heure : 2012-04-15 11:09:23 A : Talk-CA OpenStreetMap Cc : Sujet : [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. You go first. :-) Best regards, Richard ___ 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] Canadian imports: good or bad?
From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] Subject: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? Dear All, Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we discuss whether external data sources are good or not. External data sources are good. I'm suggesting that we review how we best make use of those external sources. Although CanVec is unquestionably a useful data source for aiding with mapping, I question dumping in data that will never get looked at or improved by a mapper which is what is happening in widespread areas. This is not about using CanVec in conjunction with a survey to speed mapping, this is about using CanVec where you are unfamiliar with the area and no one will ever survey. While we're on the subject of CanVec, I think the documentation needs some work. People are importing CanVec without giving it a detailed look, trusting it's representation to be correct. It is not enough to just tie in the CanVec data with existing data. The CanVec data in some areas is wrong (e.g. coastlines in CanVec 8) and cannot be imported as is. Also you need to be aware of the age of some of the data sources. In parts of BC you should not import the streams from CanVec without verification with imagery. The names are generally alright, but many of the streams have dried up or been paved over in the last 30 years. Similarly, no one should be importing the buildings from CanVec in BC. They're wrong more far more often than they're right. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
On Apr 15, 2012, at 4:45 PM, Pierre Béland infosbelas-...@yahoo.fr wrote: Let start from the beginning. What is the objective of OSM? A collaborative map of the world. Not a patchwork. We need a map with sufficient quality to support various projects. To pick some nits: OSM is not a map, but a database that people can use to create maps (and other things). And there are a lot of dynamic projects around like http://hiking.lonvia.de/en/ and http://hikebikemap.de/. See this nice nordic ski map derived from OSM : http://www.pistes-nordiques.org/ It is more developped in Europe. So Zoom-in in this area to see trails in detail. And then, pass the mouse over trails. An Elevation Profile of the trail will be proposed. Full ACK. I am currently on a bike trip from Montreal to Toronto. For that I generated my own bike specific maps for use on my Garmin GPS. And that would not have been possible without either the Canvec import (for most of the basic road data) nor without all the work that people have put into surveying, entering, editing all the bike-specific stuff to the database. So yay imports, yay users! Let's just make sure that the imports are done well (case in point : buildings from Canvec in Montreal are generally awful) Harald.___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Andrew Allison wrote: From what I see there are some conflicting arguments here. I think the question posed in the subject 'good or bad' is the wrong one. Is there a way we can have our cake and eat it too? Can we get most of the benefits from all of your below arguments? What conclusions can the Canadian community learn from our import experience during the past 3 years?. We have tried 95% automated bulk imports (ie the road imports I did in Alberta and Ontario) We have had mappers import an entire Canvec tile at once via JOSM We have had mappers import a feature at a time in a single canvec (or and other sources) tile I remain unconvinced that the regions in Canada that have had imports have had their local mapper communities harmed by these imports. I don't see the regions (in Canada) that have had fewer imports or delayed imports having better local community development than places (in Canada) that have had extensive importing. I also feel that not of all data sources are equal. Even within Canvec some layers are excellent (ie roads and lakes in most of the country) while others are often so out of date it isn't worth the time to import (ie buildings in much of Southern Ontario) When I was doing license replacement for roads I found it easier/faster to just trace over the GeoBase WMS layer(I don't consider that 'importing'). When I had to replace some lakes I found copy/pasting the features from the Canvec .OSM files produced a much better result (importing?). Steve 1 Building a community of mappers to add features to the map. Ideally local. 2 Canada is a huge country. I doubt that there are that many people willing to commit to mapping every nook. I'm sure the amount of No Trespassing signs itself would prevent it. 3 OSM is promoting itself as a competitor to google. 4 I would suspect most mappers are not aware of the license change coming and the resulting impact. Given the size of Canada, and the few mappers we have. I my self could not and probably would not have never walked / driven on every road, trail, river, lake forest etc without some else doing an import first which I myself used a base to improve OSM. I don't see any possible way to have a map without an import to use as a base. To counter my own points, Yes, you will find some people who see a great white spot as a challenge. But looking at the changes made locally I would think most people would rather tweak an existing road or park. Andrew ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
