Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Pierre Béland]

Martijn
Si je comprends bien ton message, tu proposes que la communauté canadienne 
accepte de réaliser les projets de Telenav, sinon, votre équipe prendra le 
contrôle ?  À mon avis, cette proposition ignore le rôle des communautés 
locales dans le projet OSM, et le réduit à celui d'exécutants.

Les commentaires des contributeurs canadiens allaient tous dans le même sens. 
Nous ne comprenons pas ce que vous visez exactement. Si une simple relation 
Transcanadienne répond à vos besoins, je penses que vous pouvez le réaliser 
facilement. 
Par contre, les contributeurs canadiens ont exprimé leur désaccord à ce que 
vous modifiez systématiquement les routes pour normaliser les noms selon les 
besoins de votre équipe. 
Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 28 mars 2018 15 h 43 min 31 s HAE, Martijn van Exel 
 a écrit :  
 
 Pierre, 

Consistency in the data is the main goal. This benefits all the things you 
mention, including map rendering and parsing by navigation software such as 
ours but also OSMAnd, maps.me and others.
There is a master relation for the Trans-Canada Highway / Route 
Transcanadienne[0] but it is incomplete and broken. One idea would be to repair 
it, and the province-level relations that would be the members of it. Would you 
be interested in coordinating that?

[0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243
--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org
  ___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Martijn van Exel]

Pierre, 

Consistency in the data is the main goal. This benefits all the things
you mention, including map rendering and parsing by navigation software
such as ours but also OSMAnd, maps.me and others.There is a master relation for 
the Trans-Canada Highway / Route
Transcanadienne[0] but it is incomplete and broken. One idea would be to
repair it, and the province-level relations that would be the members of
it. Would you be interested in coordinating that?
[0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243
--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, at 13:24, Pierre Béland wrote:
> Bonjour Martin,
> 
> Il me semble que les divers commentaires ont été assez clair. La
> communauté OSM du Canada est assez mature pour gérer cela et n'avons
> pas besoin que Navteq démarre un projet pour modifier ces données.> 
> L'équipe Navteq a déja créé beaucoup de problèmes en ajoutant partout
> des relations complexes pour un simple interdit de faire un virage en
> U.  Quels sont maintenant les objectifs de la tâche> 
> More Overlapping Ways in Canada
> Telenav OSM Integrity Checks's Project
> 
> 
> A mon  avis, vous devez discuter avec la communauté canadienne avant
> de démarrer de tels projets. Svp interrompre cette tâche et venez en
> discuter.> 
> Et quels sont vos objectifs pour les modifications vs la route
> Trancanadienne? Un meilleur rendu sur la carte, des itinéraires dans
> les outils de navigation ? Pourquoi ne pas simplement créer une
> relation de type route pour la route Transcanadienne?> 
> ** 
> Pierre **
> 
> 
> Le mercredi 28 mars 2018 13 h 23 min 37 s HAE, Martijn van Exel
>  a écrit :> 
> 
> Hi all, 
> 
> My colleague Olivia will respond more in depth with some suggestions
> based on your feedback. Thanks for giving our team's ideas some
> thought.> 
> In the meantime, as I was writing a post about the new version of
> MapRoulette, I thought I'd make a Challenge for misspelled Trans-
> Canada Highway names. Please find it here:
> http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2955 . There's only a
> little over 200 tasks, so that should be an easy thing to fix
> together.> 
> The Challenge is based on this Overpass query:
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xoW -- it's pretty easy to make your own
> Challenges based on your own Overpass queries or GeoJSON files.> 
> The diary post explaining MapRoulette is here:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/43596> 
> Thanks,
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, at 07:13, Begin Daniel wrote:
>> Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient
>> Roumains, Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont
>> consultés avant de faire la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant,
>> je suis entièrement en accord avec ta réponse - laissez ça à la
>> communauté canadienne!>>  


>> (I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians,
>> Javanese or Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before
>> making the change and it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your
>> answer - leave that to the Canadian community!-)>>  


>> Sent from  Mail[1] for Windows 10


>>  


>> 
>> *From:* Andrew Lester  *Sent:* Monday, March 26,
>> 2018 1:35:56 PM *To:* Olivia Robu - (p) *Cc:* talk-ca *Subject:* Re:
>> [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research>>  
>> While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even
>> within a single country. As has already been discussed, there are
>> differing conventions in different provinces, so please don't try to
>> apply a single plan to all provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM
>> will vary depending on the province.>> 
>> For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH
>> carries the 1 ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways
>> coincide with the TCH, the ref is recorded as "ref=1;19", for
>> example. There are places within cities where the TCH runs on city
>> roads with different names (e.g. Douglas Street in Victoria), so
>> those ways are named with the local name and the TCH name is recorded
>> in the alt_name or nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of
>> these to use). An alternate name should never be added to the primary
>> name in brackets like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and
>> similar) tags are for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada
>> Highway is the official local name of the road, like most of the
>> highway in BC.>> 
>> As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly
>> uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or
>> "Route Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name,
>> because those are the official spellings. Any variants can be
>> considered errors.>> 
>> As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be
>> expected. Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway
>> network varies in construction and importance all across 

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Pierre Béland]

Bonjour Martin,
Il me semble que les divers commentaires ont été assez clair. La communauté OSM 
du Canada est assez mature pour gérer cela et n'avons pas besoin que Navteq 
démarre un projet pour modifier ces données.
L'équipe Navteq a déja créé beaucoup de problèmes en ajoutant partout des 
relations complexes pour un simple interdit de faire un virage en U.  Quels 
sont maintenant les objectifs de la tâche
 More Overlapping Ways in CanadaTelenav OSM Integrity Checks's Project
A mon  avis, vous devez discuter avec la communauté canadienne avant de 
démarrer de tels projets. Svp interrompre cette tâche et venez en discuter.

Et quels sont vos objectifs pour les modifications vs la route Trancanadienne? 
Un meilleur rendu sur la carte, des itinéraires dans les outils de navigation ? 
Pourquoi ne pas simplement créer une relation de type route pour la route 
Transcanadienne?

 
Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 28 mars 2018 13 h 23 min 37 s HAE, Martijn van Exel 
 a écrit :  
 
 Hi all, 

My colleague Olivia will respond more in depth with some suggestions based on 
your feedback. Thanks for giving our team's ideas some thought.

In the meantime, as I was writing a post about the new version of MapRoulette, 
I thought I'd make a Challenge for misspelled Trans-Canada Highway names. 
Please find it here: http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2955 . 
There's only a little over 200 tasks, so that should be an easy thing to fix 
together. 

The Challenge is based on this Overpass query: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xoW 
-- it's pretty easy to make your own Challenges based on your own Overpass 
queries or GeoJSON files.

The diary post explaining MapRoulette is here: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/43596

Thanks,--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, at 07:13, Begin Daniel wrote:


Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient Roumains, 
Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont consultés avant de faire 
la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant, je suis entièrement en accord avec 
ta réponse - laissez ça à la communauté canadienne!


 


(I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians, Javanese or 
Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before making the change and 
it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your answer - leave that to the 
Canadian community!-)


 


Sent from  Mail for Windows 10


 


From: Andrew Lester 
 Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 1:35:56 PM
 To: Olivia Robu - (p)
 Cc: talk-ca
 Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research  
While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even within a 
single country. As has already been discussed, there are differing conventions 
in different provinces, so please don't try to apply a single plan to all 
provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM will vary depending on the province.

For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH carries the 1 
ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways coincide with the TCH, the ref 
is recorded as "ref=1;19", for example. There are places within cities where 
the TCH runs on city roads with different names (e.g. Douglas Street in 
Victoria), so those ways are named with the local name and the TCH name is 
recorded in the alt_name or nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of 
these to use). An alternate name should never be added to the primary name in 
brackets like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and similar) tags are 
for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada Highway is the official 
local name of the road, like most of the highway in BC.

As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly 
uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or "Route 
Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name, because those are 
the official spellings. Any variants can be considered errors.

As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be expected. 
Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway network varies in 
construction and importance all across the country, so the classification can't 
be standardized to just motorway or trunk. There are sections where primary is 
the most appropriate, and possibly even secondary in some places. Just on 
Vancouver Island alone, the roads designated as the TCH vary from a six-lane 
motorway all the way down to a two-lane effectively-tertiary road.

Since there will need to be a lot of local knowledge required for such a 
project, I strongly recommend that this project not be undertaken by Telenav. 
This is the kind of work that Canadians should be doing, being the most 
familiar with the on-the-ground situation which will dictate how the highway is 
handled in each province. The numerous past issues with Telenav's contributions 
is also a factor that can't be ignored. Does it really make sense for a team of 

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

My colleague Olivia will respond more in depth with some suggestions
based on your feedback. Thanks for giving our team's ideas some thought.
In the meantime, as I was writing a post about the new version of
MapRoulette, I thought I'd make a Challenge for misspelled Trans-Canada
Highway names. Please find it here:
http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2955 . There's only a
little over 200 tasks, so that should be an easy thing to fix together.
The Challenge is based on this Overpass query:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xoW -- it's pretty easy to make your own
Challenges based on your own Overpass queries or GeoJSON files.
The diary post explaining MapRoulette is here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/43596
Thanks,
--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, at 07:13, Begin Daniel wrote:
> Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient
> Roumains, Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont
> consultés avant de faire la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant,
> je suis entièrement en accord avec ta réponse - laissez ça à la
> communauté canadienne!>  


> (I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians,
> Javanese or Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before
> making the change and it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your
> answer - leave that to the Canadian community!-)>  


> Sent from  Mail[1] for Windows 10


>  


> 
> *From:* Andrew Lester  *Sent:* Monday, March 26,
> 2018 1:35:56 PM *To:* Olivia Robu - (p) *Cc:* talk-ca *Subject:* Re:
> [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research>  
> While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even
> within a single country. As has already been discussed, there are
> differing conventions in different provinces, so please don't try to
> apply a single plan to all provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM
> will vary depending on the province.> 
> For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH carries
> the 1 ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways coincide with
> the TCH, the ref is recorded as "ref=1;19", for example. There are
> places within cities where the TCH runs on city roads with different
> names (e.g. Douglas Street in Victoria), so those ways are named with
> the local name and the TCH name is recorded in the alt_name or
> nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of these to use). An
> alternate name should never be added to the primary name in brackets
> like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and similar) tags are
> for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada Highway is the
> official local name of the road, like most of the highway in BC.> 
> As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly
> uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or
> "Route Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name,
> because those are the official spellings. Any variants can be
> considered errors.> 
> As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be
> expected. Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway
> network varies in construction and importance all across the country,
> so the classification can't be standardized to just motorway or trunk.
> There are sections where primary is the most appropriate, and possibly
> even secondary in some places. Just on Vancouver Island alone, the
> roads designated as the TCH vary from a six-lane motorway all the way
> down to a two-lane effectively-tertiary road.> 
> Since there will need to be a lot of local knowledge required for such
> a project, I strongly recommend that this project not be undertaken by
> Telenav. This is the kind of work that Canadians should be doing,
> being the most familiar with the on-the-ground situation which will
> dictate how the highway is handled in each province. The numerous past
> issues with Telenav's contributions is also a factor that can't be
> ignored. Does it really make sense for a team of Romanians with a
> history of questionable decisions to be making sweeping changes to the
> Canadian national highway network? At least they've brought a proposal
> to the community this time rather than just push forward with a faulty
> plan like they have in the past. I'm still cleaning up after previous
> Telenav projects in my area that added countless non-existent turn
> restrictions and names and also removed valid data.> 
> Andrew
> Victoria, BC, Canada
> 
> 
> *From: *"Olivia Robu - (p)" 
> *To: *"talk-ca" 
> *Sent: *Monday, March 26, 2018 4:20:16 AM
> *Subject: *[Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research
> 
> Hello,


> The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the ways
> and relations of Trans-Canada Highway.> Here are some conclusions from this 
> research:


>  * The highway is formed from 30 routes;
>  * Every route has different names for the 

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 Open Data and Data Mirroring

[Jonathan Brown]

Lessons learned from Finland and Poland in using OSM and Open Data: 
https://blog.core.okfn.org/2018/03/28/open-data-day-2018-getting-the-local-communities-in-porto-and-helsinki-to-talk-about-open-mapping/

Also, the research by Professor Peter Johnson at Waterloo on models of direct 
editing of government spatial data is germane to the BC2020 mapathon events. 
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15230406.2016.1176536
Two issues related to licensing: 
A) data ownership and license may permit or restrict government usage of 
contributed data, integration with existing government data, and hamper its 
ability to share data with others, particularly under an open license. 
Governments may face issues with accepting data from individuals through their 
own data collection system as users would need to acknowledge that they claim 
no right to the data or the database. Without such a clause, government would 
be at risk of having data contributors potentially remove their edits from a 
database. 
B) A second challenge would come from the integration of part or all of a 
separate database, such as OSM into a government database, which is then 
provided under a separate license than OSM (Saunders, Scassa, and Lauriault 
2012). OSM currently uses a license that has a share-alike clause, where any 
significant portion of the OSM data incorporated into a “derivative” database 
must continue to be licensed under the same Open Database License (ODbL v.1.0), 
including a share-alike clause. This means that any derivative data set must 
then be shared with the same or compatible licensing as the current OSM 
database (for more information, see https://wiki.osmfoundation. 
org/wiki/License). Through a complex and emerging field of database licensing 
law and compatibility, this share-alike clause may restrict the potential for 
blended OSM-government data products to be created as this derivative database 
would need to be contributed back to OSM and be made available under a separate 
license than from the government open data license. For example, the United 
States Geologic Survey (USGS) notes that they cannot integrate OSM data into 
the USGS National Map since OSM data uses a Creative Commons Share-Alike 
license, while their work needs to be under the public domain (Wolf, McNinch, 
and Poore 2011).

For the Durham Region Mapathon even that has been rescheduled for May 3, we 
could use crowdsourcing and data mirroring (below) based on the feedback I got 
from Professor Johnson who has demonstrated the value of open municipal data 
and GIS to local K-12 classroom teachers and students. 

Peter explores the following four models for inputting geospatial data into 
government databases in the above paper: 
1. status quo of open data
2. data curation
3. data mirroring
4. acceptance of external crowdsourced data.

Potential Issues with crowdsourcing: 
• “jurisdictionality of contribution, anonymity, and indeed the authority of 
contributors to make changes are all relevant in the instance that government 
were to adopt OSM. Through using OSM as a source of not only geospatial data, 
but as a conduit for edits, government shifts power over data creation and 
editing outside the walls of city hall.” (see page 7). 

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