Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Kevin Farrugia]

Generally the planimetric CAD drawings (what Stewart posted) are/were the
source for most municipal building footprints, from what I've seen in my
experience. In some cases the footprints are still maintained in that
format and exported out for GIS, while in other cases they're now
exclusively maintained in GIS. Ottawa may be doing the latter, which might
explain the mismatch between the two.  I know the latter has
happened/happens at my work.

On Oct 25, 2016 8:54 AM, "James"  wrote:

There is also a factual basis in the example Scruss provided:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:12.PNG

TD Place(Renovated/New buildings constructed in Summer 2014) is not mapped
in the DWG(scruss said as far back as 2011)
In the newer data it is:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:13.PNG

I know this as I am a local mapper.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:52 PM, James  wrote:

> I can guarantee that this data is roof level data. While I was examining
> data there were cart returns mapped as outlines. This data was also traced
> via orthophotos
>
> On Oct 24, 2016 6:45 PM, "Christoph Hormann"  wrote:
>
>> On Monday 24 October 2016, Stewart C. Russell wrote:
>> >
>> > > Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building
>> > > data to be imported is?
>> >
>> > Yes, as far as I understand it, at least: these data to be imported
>> > were given to a group of OSM contributors by the City of Ottawa. They
>> > have explicit permission to include it in OSM from the City. The only
>> > place you can inspect the data is on the contributors' own hosting
>> > sites, as the city doesn't host it anywhere. Details of the licence
>> > and permissions are on the Ottawa import information page.
>>
>> I would then suggest to contact the person who provided the files for
>> metadata and specifications on those, in particular dates and methods
>> of survey, processing applied, especially coordinate system conversions
>> and specifications on what exactly is contained in it (i.e. what the
>> definition of a building is here and if it's ground footprints or roof
>> outlines).  You also might want to specifically ask regarding the
>> geometry issues i pointed out earlier.
>>
>> You can be pretty sure the original producer of this data set has this
>> information and if there is interest in having this data in OSM they
>> should also be willing to provide such information.
>>
>> In OpenStreetMap we put high importance on knowing and documenting how
>> data is acquired since - as every experienced mapper knows - sources of
>> information can be faulty and misleading.  Just because someone says: I
>> have this data here and you may use it and it mostly looks reasonable
>> and plausible at the first glance does not mean we should throw all our
>> sense for critical evaluation of sources out of the window, especially
>> if you plan to add several hundred thousand new features.
>>
>> > The public 2011 data set is cut into 2×1 km tiles, slicing through
>> > buildings on the border. There are no common attributes which would
>> > allow repair, as the data is packaged in AutoCAD DWG files.
>>
>> This alone should not be a problem since you know the location of the
>> cuts and therefore could dissolve them based on position.
>>
>> The real question is - is there a factual basis for the assumption that
>> the data you intend to import is newer than the data in these files?
>> Note a different level of detail is not necessarily an indication for
>> age or accuracy of the data.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>


-- 
外に遊びに行こう！

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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

There is also a factual basis in the example Scruss provided:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:12.PNG

TD Place(Renovated/New buildings constructed in Summer 2014) is not mapped
in the DWG(scruss said as far back as 2011)
In the newer data it is:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:13.PNG

I know this as I am a local mapper.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:52 PM, James  wrote:

> I can guarantee that this data is roof level data. While I was examining
> data there were cart returns mapped as outlines. This data was also traced
> via orthophotos
>
> On Oct 24, 2016 6:45 PM, "Christoph Hormann"  wrote:
>
>> On Monday 24 October 2016, Stewart C. Russell wrote:
>> >
>> > > Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building
>> > > data to be imported is?
>> >
>> > Yes, as far as I understand it, at least: these data to be imported
>> > were given to a group of OSM contributors by the City of Ottawa. They
>> > have explicit permission to include it in OSM from the City. The only
>> > place you can inspect the data is on the contributors' own hosting
>> > sites, as the city doesn't host it anywhere. Details of the licence
>> > and permissions are on the Ottawa import information page.
>>
>> I would then suggest to contact the person who provided the files for
>> metadata and specifications on those, in particular dates and methods
>> of survey, processing applied, especially coordinate system conversions
>> and specifications on what exactly is contained in it (i.e. what the
>> definition of a building is here and if it's ground footprints or roof
>> outlines).  You also might want to specifically ask regarding the
>> geometry issues i pointed out earlier.
>>
>> You can be pretty sure the original producer of this data set has this
>> information and if there is interest in having this data in OSM they
>> should also be willing to provide such information.
>>
>> In OpenStreetMap we put high importance on knowing and documenting how
>> data is acquired since - as every experienced mapper knows - sources of
>> information can be faulty and misleading.  Just because someone says: I
>> have this data here and you may use it and it mostly looks reasonable
>> and plausible at the first glance does not mean we should throw all our
>> sense for critical evaluation of sources out of the window, especially
>> if you plan to add several hundred thousand new features.
>>
>> > The public 2011 data set is cut into 2×1 km tiles, slicing through
>> > buildings on the border. There are no common attributes which would
>> > allow repair, as the data is packaged in AutoCAD DWG files.
>>
>> This alone should not be a problem since you know the location of the
>> cuts and therefore could dissolve them based on position.
>>
>> The real question is - is there a factual basis for the assumption that
>> the data you intend to import is newer than the data in these files?
>> Note a different level of detail is not necessarily an indication for
>> age or accuracy of the data.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>


-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

I believe Bjenk was kidding when stating he'd be buying a coffee.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:16 PM, john whelan  wrote:

> Both the City of Ottawa and the Canadian Federal Government have rules in
> place about bribery and corruption.  Buying a civil servant a coffee these
> days is one of the forbidden activities.  I do trust you are not suggesting
> that illegal methods were used when the data was obtained.
>
> The use of the particular data concerned was first raised by one of the
> Open Data specialists at Carlton University at a meeting between many
> parties.  Open data guy at the City of Ottawa unfortunately was not present
> but the representatives from the City of Ottawa did say it would be looked
> into.  Later I spoke to them after the meeting and they thought with the
> current climate of cooperation with different government levels there
> should not be a problem.
>
> The traditional way to gently refuse something is for it to get lost in
> the system.  I haven't seen any signs of that yet.
>
> I think things have moved forward but perhaps not at the pace everyone
> might like.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 24 Oct 2016 6:03 pm, "James"  wrote:
>
>> Bjenk(STATS Can) is communicating/pushing with the the city of Ottawa,
>> even may resolve to offering coffee bribes to be able to host the shared
>> file on open.canada.ca. He's been relentless in his effort to move the
>> project forward, but as most Canadian gouvernment entities it moves at a
>> snails pace as it is stuck in bureaucratic hell.
>>
>> On Oct 24, 2016 5:38 PM, "Stewart C. Russell"  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Christoph,
>>>
>>> > Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data
>>> to
>>> > be imported is?
>>>
>>> Yes, as far as I understand it, at least: these data to be imported were
>>> given to a group of OSM contributors by the City of Ottawa. They have
>>> explicit permission to include it in OSM from the City. The only place
>>> you can inspect the data is on the contributors' own hosting sites, as
>>> the city doesn't host it anywhere. Details of the licence and
>>> permissions are on the Ottawa import information page.
>>>
>>> > What is shown in
>>> >
>>> > https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45
>>> >
>>> > does not match geometry-wise.
>>>
>>> I know. That link was derived from the city's own topo database from
>>> 2011, which *is* published on the city's open data website. I have a
>>> feeling that the city doesn't want to give away their 2016 topo database
>>> — not realising that by allowing the 2016 building outlines to be
>>> imported into OSM, they kind of *are* giving away the current database
>>> ...
>>>
>>> The public 2011 data set is cut into 2×1 km tiles, slicing through
>>> buildings on the border. There are no common attributes which would
>>> allow repair, as the data is packaged in AutoCAD DWG files.
>>>
>>> So the options are:
>>>
>>> 1. Import from a current source that we have OSM contributors' word that
>>> was provided by the city under a permissive licence, or
>>>
>>> 2. Import from a data set that is published on the City website but is
>>> possibly outdated, is in a horrible file format, has no documentation or
>>> metadata (apart from the licence) and would need a large amount of
>>> cleanup to be remotely usable.
>>>
>>> If [2] is the only option, I have a feeling that the Canadian federal
>>> government, the City of Ottawa and Open North (the open data advocacy
>>> group providing coding and community liaison support) would be strongly
>>> disinclined to work with or support OSM again. Worst of all, the tiny
>>> Canadian OSM community might lose some very dedicated mappers if this
>>> process puts them off contributing again.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>>  Stewart
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Imports mailing list
>>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>>


-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[john whelan]

Both the City of Ottawa and the Canadian Federal Government have rules in
place about bribery and corruption.  Buying a civil servant a coffee these
days is one of the forbidden activities.  I do trust you are not suggesting
that illegal methods were used when the data was obtained.

The use of the particular data concerned was first raised by one of the
Open Data specialists at Carlton University at a meeting between many
parties.  Open data guy at the City of Ottawa unfortunately was not present
but the representatives from the City of Ottawa did say it would be looked
into.  Later I spoke to them after the meeting and they thought with the
current climate of cooperation with different government levels there
should not be a problem.

The traditional way to gently refuse something is for it to get lost in the
system.  I haven't seen any signs of that yet.

I think things have moved forward but perhaps not at the pace everyone
might like.

Cheerio John

On 24 Oct 2016 6:03 pm, "James"  wrote:

> Bjenk(STATS Can) is communicating/pushing with the the city of Ottawa,
> even may resolve to offering coffee bribes to be able to host the shared
> file on open.canada.ca. He's been relentless in his effort to move the
> project forward, but as most Canadian gouvernment entities it moves at a
> snails pace as it is stuck in bureaucratic hell.
>
> On Oct 24, 2016 5:38 PM, "Stewart C. Russell"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Christoph,
>>
>> > Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data to
>> > be imported is?
>>
>> Yes, as far as I understand it, at least: these data to be imported were
>> given to a group of OSM contributors by the City of Ottawa. They have
>> explicit permission to include it in OSM from the City. The only place
>> you can inspect the data is on the contributors' own hosting sites, as
>> the city doesn't host it anywhere. Details of the licence and
>> permissions are on the Ottawa import information page.
>>
>> > What is shown in
>> >
>> > https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45
>> >
>> > does not match geometry-wise.
>>
>> I know. That link was derived from the city's own topo database from
>> 2011, which *is* published on the city's open data website. I have a
>> feeling that the city doesn't want to give away their 2016 topo database
>> — not realising that by allowing the 2016 building outlines to be
>> imported into OSM, they kind of *are* giving away the current database ...
>>
>> The public 2011 data set is cut into 2×1 km tiles, slicing through
>> buildings on the border. There are no common attributes which would
>> allow repair, as the data is packaged in AutoCAD DWG files.
>>
>> So the options are:
>>
>> 1. Import from a current source that we have OSM contributors' word that
>> was provided by the city under a permissive licence, or
>>
>> 2. Import from a data set that is published on the City website but is
>> possibly outdated, is in a horrible file format, has no documentation or
>> metadata (apart from the licence) and would need a large amount of
>> cleanup to be remotely usable.
>>
>> If [2] is the only option, I have a feeling that the Canadian federal
>> government, the City of Ottawa and Open North (the open data advocacy
>> group providing coding and community liaison support) would be strongly
>> disinclined to work with or support OSM again. Worst of all, the tiny
>> Canadian OSM community might lose some very dedicated mappers if this
>> process puts them off contributing again.
>>
>> cheers,
>>  Stewart
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

Bjenk(STATS Can) is communicating/pushing with the the city of Ottawa, even
may resolve to offering coffee bribes to be able to host the shared file on
open.canada.ca. He's been relentless in his effort to move the project
forward, but as most Canadian gouvernment entities it moves at a snails
pace as it is stuck in bureaucratic hell.

On Oct 24, 2016 5:38 PM, "Stewart C. Russell"  wrote:

> Hi Christoph,
>
> > Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data to
> > be imported is?
>
> Yes, as far as I understand it, at least: these data to be imported were
> given to a group of OSM contributors by the City of Ottawa. They have
> explicit permission to include it in OSM from the City. The only place
> you can inspect the data is on the contributors' own hosting sites, as
> the city doesn't host it anywhere. Details of the licence and
> permissions are on the Ottawa import information page.
>
> > What is shown in
> >
> > https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45
> >
> > does not match geometry-wise.
>
> I know. That link was derived from the city's own topo database from
> 2011, which *is* published on the city's open data website. I have a
> feeling that the city doesn't want to give away their 2016 topo database
> — not realising that by allowing the 2016 building outlines to be
> imported into OSM, they kind of *are* giving away the current database ...
>
> The public 2011 data set is cut into 2×1 km tiles, slicing through
> buildings on the border. There are no common attributes which would
> allow repair, as the data is packaged in AutoCAD DWG files.
>
> So the options are:
>
> 1. Import from a current source that we have OSM contributors' word that
> was provided by the city under a permissive licence, or
>
> 2. Import from a data set that is published on the City website but is
> possibly outdated, is in a horrible file format, has no documentation or
> metadata (apart from the licence) and would need a large amount of
> cleanup to be remotely usable.
>
> If [2] is the only option, I have a feeling that the Canadian federal
> government, the City of Ottawa and Open North (the open data advocacy
> group providing coding and community liaison support) would be strongly
> disinclined to work with or support OSM again. Worst of all, the tiny
> Canadian OSM community might lose some very dedicated mappers if this
> process puts them off contributing again.
>
> cheers,
>  Stewart
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Jeff McKenna]

On 2016-10-24 4:08 PM, James wrote:

I've updated the file(I can't delete it without and admin)




thanks James, looks good.

-jeff




--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna





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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

I've updated the file(I can't delete it without and admin)

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jeff McKenna  wrote:

> On 2016-10-24 3:50 PM, James wrote:
>
>> It was more to prove that the emails are Trusted sources and not made
>> up. The emails are public already in the contact section of the import
>> wiki.If I hide emails/domains then I'm obfuscating the process. These
>> emails are public emails @ottawa.ca  and @canada.ca
>> . No personal emails are visible
>>
>> There are full contact info, including work phone numbers, included in
> that screenshot.  Please be careful and respect privacy, in sharing emails
> to public (and forever archived) mailing lists, where bots and other nasty
> things do live.  I am giving you my strong advice, managing thousands of
> these mailing lists for decades now; but I am not a 'talk-ca' admin.
>
>
> -jeff
>
>
> --
> Jeff McKenna
> President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Jeff McKenna]

On 2016-10-24 3:50 PM, James wrote:

It was more to prove that the emails are Trusted sources and not made
up. The emails are public already in the contact section of the import
wiki.If I hide emails/domains then I'm obfuscating the process. These
emails are public emails @ottawa.ca  and @canada.ca
. No personal emails are visible

There are full contact info, including work phone numbers, included in 
that screenshot.  Please be careful and respect privacy, in sharing 
emails to public (and forever archived) mailing lists, where bots and 
other nasty things do live.  I am giving you my strong advice, managing 
thousands of these mailing lists for decades now; but I am not a 
'talk-ca' admin.


-jeff


--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna








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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

It was more to prove that the emails are Trusted sources and not made up.
The emails are public already in the contact section of the import wiki.If
I hide emails/domains then I'm obfuscating the process. These emails are
public emails @ottawa.ca and @canada.ca. No personal emails are visible

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Jeff McKenna  wrote:

> On 2016-10-24 3:28 PM, James wrote:
>
>> I've received a forwarded email from Bjenk that may settle the debate
>> where the data originates from (I'd forward it to the list, but it would
>> be lost in the mail archive and detach the main thread(:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ProofOttawaStatsCan.png
>>
> Hi James, maybe upload another version of that email with those private
> email addresses removed.  Just to respect everyone's privacy (even mailing
> list archives remove all sender email addresses).  Openness is great, but
> we must be careful.
>
> -jeff
>
>
> --
> Jeff McKenna
> President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Jeff McKenna]

On 2016-10-24 3:28 PM, James wrote:

I've received a forwarded email from Bjenk that may settle the debate
where the data originates from (I'd forward it to the list, but it would
be lost in the mail archive and detach the main thread(:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ProofOttawaStatsCan.png
Hi James, maybe upload another version of that email with those private 
email addresses removed.  Just to respect everyone's privacy (even 
mailing list archives remove all sender email addresses).  Openness is 
great, but we must be careful.


-jeff


--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna






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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

You asked:
Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data to
be imported is?

I clarified. I did not change the subject. The source of the data is the
city of Ottawa

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Christoph Hormann 
wrote:

> On Monday 24 October 2016, James wrote:
> > As stated, multiple times on this list already: the city of Ottawa
> > gave data to Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada gave us (amazon
> > cloud link) data, which is just building outlines.
>
> Please don't change the subject, Stewart asked
>
> > are people generally happy with the provenance of the data now?
>
> indicating there is new information on this available now.  If not we
> are still at what i said earlier:
>
> > Well - without context on specifications and origin of the data i
> > cannot properly assess the import plans for it.  We do not even know
> > when this data was surveyed.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

As for general availability of the files I have this email chain(which was
documented that there was bureaucracy behind the scenes):


*From:* Perkins, Stephen M [mailto:stephen.perk...@ottawa.ca]
*Sent:* July-26-16 4:15 PM
*To:* Ellefsen, Bjenk (STATCAN) 
*Cc:* Cross, Ian 
*Subject:* RE: Open Canada



So long as it can be noted that the City of Ottawa does not intend to keep
this information up-to-date, I don’t see why not.

*-Stephen*



*From:* Ellefsen, Bjenk (STATCAN) [mailto:bjenk.ellef...@canada.ca
]
*Sent:* 26 July, 2016 9:30 AM
*To:* Cross, Ian; Perkins, Stephen M
*Subject:* Open Canada



Hello,



I want to thank you for sharing the data on urban buildings. I am looking
into getting this file into the hands of OSM Canada and I am considering
the open.canada.ca portal.



Are you comfortable with that approach?



Kind regards,



Bjenk Ellefsen, PhD



Data Exploration and Integration Lab (DEIL) | Lab pour l’exploration et
l’intégration de données (LEID)

Center for Special Business Projects | Centre des Projets Spéciaux sur les
entreprises

Statistics Canada | Statistique Canada

(343) 998-3004







This e-mail originates from the City of Ottawa e-mail system. Any
distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains
by other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. Thank you.
Le présent courriel a été expédié par le système de courriels de la Ville
d'Ottawa. Toute distribution, utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou
des renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que son
destinataire prévu est interdite. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration.



*From:* Cross, Ian [mailto:ian.cr...@ottawa.ca]
*Sent:* July-26-16 11:13 AM
*To:* Ellefsen, Bjenk (STATCAN) ; Perkins,
Stephen M 
*Subject:* RE: Open Canada



Hi Bjenk,

I have no problem with that.



Ian


On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:28 PM, James  wrote:

> I've received a forwarded email from Bjenk that may settle the debate
> where the data originates from (I'd forward it to the list, but it would be
> lost in the mail archive and detach the main thread(:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ProofOttawaStatsCan.png
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:13 PM, James  wrote:
>
>> As stated, multiple times on this list already: the city of Ottawa gave
>> data to Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada gave us (amazon cloud link)
>> data, which is just building outlines.
>>
>> In case you are in doubt this project is actually happening or not (and I
>> am just making the whole thing up):
>> http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/crowdsourcing
>> on facebook(https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada):
>> https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143
>> 295004.32908.125909694187216/996642833780560/?type=3
>> https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143
>> 295004.32908.125909694187216/995955653849278/?type=3
>> https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143
>> 295004.32908.125909694187216/994856040625906/?type=3
>>
>> As well as Bjenk(current project lead on this) posting on the mailing
>> list back in july:
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2016-July/007034.html
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Christoph Hormann 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday 24 October 2016, Stewart C. Russell wrote:
>>> >
>>> > The new data is pretty close, though. Anyone need a
>>> > demo/writeup/picture, or are people generally happy with the
>>> > provenance of the data now?
>>>
>>> Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data to
>>> be imported is?
>>>
>>> What is shown in
>>>
>>> https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45
>>>
>>> does not match geometry-wise.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christoph Hormann
>>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Imports mailing list
>>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 外に遊びに行こう！
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Denis Carriere]

Christoph,

At the moment the Ottawa building footprint dataset is not on any official
portal other then being shared on a public Amazon S3 Bucket.

You can download the file here:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/statscan/ottawa-buildings.geojson

The data doesn't contain any specific tags, only the following:

*source: *City of Ottawa
*building: *yes


Cheers,




*~~*
*Denis Carriere*
*GIS Software & Systems Specialist*

*Twitter: @DenisCarriere *
*OSM: DenisCarriere *
GitHub: DenisCarriere 
Email: carriere.de...@gmail.com

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:13 PM, James  wrote:

> As stated, multiple times on this list already: the city of Ottawa gave
> data to Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada gave us (amazon cloud link)
> data, which is just building outlines.
>
> In case you are in doubt this project is actually happening or not (and I
> am just making the whole thing up):
> http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/crowdsourcing
> on facebook(https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada):
> https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143295004.32908.
> 125909694187216/996642833780560/?type=3
> https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143295004.32908.
> 125909694187216/995955653849278/?type=3
> https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143295004.32908.
> 125909694187216/994856040625906/?type=3
>
> As well as Bjenk(current project lead on this) posting on the mailing list
> back in july:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2016-July/007034.html
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Christoph Hormann 
> wrote:
>
>> On Monday 24 October 2016, Stewart C. Russell wrote:
>> >
>> > The new data is pretty close, though. Anyone need a
>> > demo/writeup/picture, or are people generally happy with the
>> > provenance of the data now?
>>
>> Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data to
>> be imported is?
>>
>> What is shown in
>>
>> https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45
>>
>> does not match geometry-wise.
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

As stated, multiple times on this list already: the city of Ottawa gave
data to Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada gave us (amazon cloud link)
data, which is just building outlines.

In case you are in doubt this project is actually happening or not (and I
am just making the whole thing up):
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/crowdsourcing
on facebook(https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada):
https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143295004.32908.125909694187216/996642833780560/?type=3
https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143295004.32908.125909694187216/995955653849278/?type=3
https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsCanada/photos/a.168165143295004.32908.125909694187216/994856040625906/?type=3

As well as Bjenk(current project lead on this) posting on the mailing list
back in july:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2016-July/007034.html


On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Christoph Hormann 
wrote:

> On Monday 24 October 2016, Stewart C. Russell wrote:
> >
> > The new data is pretty close, though. Anyone need a
> > demo/writeup/picture, or are people generally happy with the
> > provenance of the data now?
>
> Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building data to
> be imported is?
>
> What is shown in
>
> https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45
>
> does not match geometry-wise.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

Seems like they may have dumped it on their servers to the public:
http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data
This would explain why some buildings are outdated:


*Update Frequency: Never*as compared to:
http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/addresspoints

*Update Frequency: Weekly*

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Stewart C. Russell 
wrote:

> On 2016-10-24 08:04 AM, James wrote:
> > I've updated the documentation and incorporated Scruss's findings on the
> > build source data:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:
> Ottawa/Import/TopographicMap
>
> Cool! I was hoping to be able to show that the geojson data that you
> were given exactly matches that on the City of Ottawa website, and in
> doing so help out by saying
>
> If James's data* == City of Ottawa public data,
> then it clears up the data availability issue
>
> … but it doesn't exactly match. The city's AutoCAD data looks older, as
> it has the odd building and feature missing.
>
> The new data is pretty close, though. Anyone need a
> demo/writeup/picture, or are people generally happy with the provenance
> of the data now?
>
> cheers,
>  Stewart
>
> *: yes, I know it's not James's data, but it's a lot shorter than typing
> in the source and history.
>
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Stewart C. Russell]

On 2016-10-24 08:04 AM, James wrote:
> I've updated the documentation and incorporated Scruss's findings on the
> build source data:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/TopographicMap

Cool! I was hoping to be able to show that the geojson data that you
were given exactly matches that on the City of Ottawa website, and in
doing so help out by saying

If James's data* == City of Ottawa public data,
then it clears up the data availability issue

… but it doesn't exactly match. The city's AutoCAD data looks older, as
it has the odd building and feature missing.

The new data is pretty close, though. Anyone need a
demo/writeup/picture, or are people generally happy with the provenance
of the data now?

cheers,
 Stewart

*: yes, I know it's not James's data, but it's a lot shorter than typing
in the source and history.


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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

So to obtain all data for building outlines(from source) (from what scruss
has provided) we would need to convert all tiles of the building outline
and join them together as it clips on edge of tile:
http://i66.tinypic.com/2i1ffpx.png
As for additional information from the DWG I have not see any except if you
assume(may be inaccurate) certain attributes based on the layer (i.e. house
layer = building=house) instead of using the more generic value of
building=yes.

I do not see any advantages working from the source file over the geojson
linked in this discussion

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 8:04 AM, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've updated the documentation and incorporated Scruss's findings on the
> build source data:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:
> Ottawa/Import/TopographicMap
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, only very large buildings can be found as polygons in the Canvec
>> product.
>>
>> Furthermore, NRCan did not update the Canvec buildings layer for more
>> than 20 years (the oldest is 1944), with only a few exceptions…
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* James [mailto:james2...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Saturday, 22 October, 2016 10:54
>> *To:* Stewart C. Russell
>> *Cc:* Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
>> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses
>> [Statistics Canada project]
>>
>>
>>
>> http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/canvec/shp/ManMade/
>>
>> 50K man made just seems to be nodes of where buildings are located,
>> instead of outlines.
>>
>> Judging by :
>> http://atlas.gc.ca/toporama/en/index.html
>>
>> They have a few buildings in CanVEC, but not all of them. Seems like
>> massive buildings like schools and malls, residential buildings are out.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2016-10-21 11:41 PM, James wrote:
>> > Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and
>> > roads, driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file
>>
>> Yes, for sure.
>>
>> I've now had more of a chance to look at the data (thanks, Ottawa, for
>> providing no docs at all ...). I'm pretty sure that the data at
>> http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data is the source of what
>> the Ottawa group were given.
>>
>> In the 31 gigabytes of converted files, about 8-10 of the 177 total
>> layers might be of interest. But:
>>
>> * The files are in some kind of MTM projection, but I don't know the
>> datum. Some munis still love their NAD27, so getting this right is
>> crucial.
>>
>> * These were digitized 2010-2011 at the latest. Since municipalities
>> share data with NRCan, aren't these outlines already available in a
>> recent iteration of CanVec in a much more useful (i.e., anything but
>> DWG) format?
>>
>> My notes on the files, so far:
>> https://gist.github.com/scruss/e7f85da2e7943cb1a1d13772fbe14
>> 4d3#file-ottawabfomapdata-md
>>
>> (feel free to use/modify/etc)
>>
>> If anyone wants 31 GB of converted DXFs, let me know. It took Teigha
>> several hours on a quad core with SSDs to convert this, so I'm not going
>> to delete it lightly.
>>
>> cheers,
>>  Stewart
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> 外に遊びに行こう！
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

I've updated the documentation and incorporated Scruss's findings on the
build source data:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/TopographicMap

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Well, only very large buildings can be found as polygons in the Canvec
> product.
>
> Furthermore, NRCan did not update the Canvec buildings layer for more than
> 20 years (the oldest is 1944), with only a few exceptions…
>
>
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> *From:* James [mailto:james2...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, 22 October, 2016 10:54
> *To:* Stewart C. Russell
> *Cc:* Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses
> [Statistics Canada project]
>
>
>
> http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/canvec/shp/ManMade/
>
> 50K man made just seems to be nodes of where buildings are located,
> instead of outlines.
>
> Judging by :
> http://atlas.gc.ca/toporama/en/index.html
>
> They have a few buildings in CanVEC, but not all of them. Seems like
> massive buildings like schools and malls, residential buildings are out.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On 2016-10-21 11:41 PM, James wrote:
> > Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and
> > roads, driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file
>
> Yes, for sure.
>
> I've now had more of a chance to look at the data (thanks, Ottawa, for
> providing no docs at all ...). I'm pretty sure that the data at
> http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data is the source of what
> the Ottawa group were given.
>
> In the 31 gigabytes of converted files, about 8-10 of the 177 total
> layers might be of interest. But:
>
> * The files are in some kind of MTM projection, but I don't know the
> datum. Some munis still love their NAD27, so getting this right is crucial.
>
> * These were digitized 2010-2011 at the latest. Since municipalities
> share data with NRCan, aren't these outlines already available in a
> recent iteration of CanVec in a much more useful (i.e., anything but
> DWG) format?
>
> My notes on the files, so far:
> https://gist.github.com/scruss/e7f85da2e7943cb1a1d13772fbe144
> d3#file-ottawabfomapdata-md
>
> (feel free to use/modify/etc)
>
> If anyone wants 31 GB of converted DXFs, let me know. It took Teigha
> several hours on a quad core with SSDs to convert this, so I'm not going
> to delete it lightly.
>
> cheers,
>  Stewart
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Begin Daniel]

Well, only very large buildings can be found as polygons in the Canvec product.
Furthermore, NRCan did not update the Canvec buildings layer for more than 20 
years (the oldest is 1944), with only a few exceptions…

Daniel

From: James [mailto:james2...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, 22 October, 2016 10:54
To: Stewart C. Russell
Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses 
[Statistics Canada project]

http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/canvec/shp/ManMade/
50K man made just seems to be nodes of where buildings are located, instead of 
outlines.
Judging by :
http://atlas.gc.ca/toporama/en/index.html
They have a few buildings in CanVEC, but not all of them. Seems like massive 
buildings like schools and malls, residential buildings are out.

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Stewart C. Russell 
<scr...@gmail.com<mailto:scr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 2016-10-21 11:41 PM, James wrote:
> Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and
> roads, driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file

Yes, for sure.

I've now had more of a chance to look at the data (thanks, Ottawa, for
providing no docs at all ...). I'm pretty sure that the data at
http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data is the source of what
the Ottawa group were given.

In the 31 gigabytes of converted files, about 8-10 of the 177 total
layers might be of interest. But:

* The files are in some kind of MTM projection, but I don't know the
datum. Some munis still love their NAD27, so getting this right is crucial.

* These were digitized 2010-2011 at the latest. Since municipalities
share data with NRCan, aren't these outlines already available in a
recent iteration of CanVec in a much more useful (i.e., anything but
DWG) format?

My notes on the files, so far:
https://gist.github.com/scruss/e7f85da2e7943cb1a1d13772fbe144d3#file-ottawabfomapdata-md

(feel free to use/modify/etc)

If anyone wants 31 GB of converted DXFs, let me know. It took Teigha
several hours on a quad core with SSDs to convert this, so I'm not going
to delete it lightly.

cheers,
 Stewart


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



--
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Stewart C. Russell]

On 2016-10-22 12:12 AM, James wrote:
> Converting, DWG to DXF to open in qgis should be fun

nah, all that pointenclicky would do me no good at all. This is what OGR
is for:

ogr2ogr -f GeoJSON -s_srs epsg:2951 -t_srs epsg:4326 \
   -dialect SQLite \
   -sql "select * from entities where LAYER='house'" \
   glebe-houses-4326.geojson 368029.dxf

Assuming I picked the right datum (I've been burned before) here are
some houses from in and around The Glebe:

https://gist.github.com/scruss/5a3f469c47df5d27fdba28258c273b45

I see that building outlines get sliced on tile boundaries dammit.

 Stewart

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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/canvec/shp/ManMade/
50K man made just seems to be nodes of where buildings are located, instead
of outlines.

Judging by :
http://atlas.gc.ca/toporama/en/index.html
They have a few buildings in CanVEC, but not all of them. Seems like
massive buildings like schools and malls, residential buildings are out.

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Stewart C. Russell 
wrote:

> On 2016-10-21 11:41 PM, James wrote:
> > Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and
> > roads, driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file
>
> Yes, for sure.
>
> I've now had more of a chance to look at the data (thanks, Ottawa, for
> providing no docs at all ...). I'm pretty sure that the data at
> http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data is the source of what
> the Ottawa group were given.
>
> In the 31 gigabytes of converted files, about 8-10 of the 177 total
> layers might be of interest. But:
>
> * The files are in some kind of MTM projection, but I don't know the
> datum. Some munis still love their NAD27, so getting this right is crucial.
>
> * These were digitized 2010-2011 at the latest. Since municipalities
> share data with NRCan, aren't these outlines already available in a
> recent iteration of CanVec in a much more useful (i.e., anything but
> DWG) format?
>
> My notes on the files, so far:
> https://gist.github.com/scruss/e7f85da2e7943cb1a1d13772fbe144
> d3#file-ottawabfomapdata-md
>
> (feel free to use/modify/etc)
>
> If anyone wants 31 GB of converted DXFs, let me know. It took Teigha
> several hours on a quad core with SSDs to convert this, so I'm not going
> to delete it lightly.
>
> cheers,
>  Stewart
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Stewart C. Russell]

On 2016-10-21 11:41 PM, James wrote:
> Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and
> roads, driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file

Yes, for sure.

I've now had more of a chance to look at the data (thanks, Ottawa, for
providing no docs at all ...). I'm pretty sure that the data at
http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data is the source of what
the Ottawa group were given.

In the 31 gigabytes of converted files, about 8-10 of the 177 total
layers might be of interest. But:

* The files are in some kind of MTM projection, but I don't know the
datum. Some munis still love their NAD27, so getting this right is crucial.

* These were digitized 2010-2011 at the latest. Since municipalities
share data with NRCan, aren't these outlines already available in a
recent iteration of CanVec in a much more useful (i.e., anything but
DWG) format?

My notes on the files, so far:
https://gist.github.com/scruss/e7f85da2e7943cb1a1d13772fbe144d3#file-ottawabfomapdata-md

(feel free to use/modify/etc)

If anyone wants 31 GB of converted DXFs, let me know. It took Teigha
several hours on a quad core with SSDs to convert this, so I'm not going
to delete it lightly.

cheers,
 Stewart


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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

Converting, DWG to DXF to open in qgis should be fun

On Oct 21, 2016 11:41 PM, "James"  wrote:

> Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and roads,
> driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file
>
> On Oct 21, 2016 11:19 PM, "Stewart C. Russell"  wrote:
>
>> On 2016-10-20 10:37 AM, James wrote:
>> >
>> > We seem to be turning in a circle around "building source data is not
>> > publicly available"
>>
>> These might be the source data:
>>  http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data
>> Unfortunately, it's a 3+ GB archive of DWG files that has taken nearly
>> two hours to partly download, so I can't tell you if it matches your
>> transformed data yet.
>>
>>  Stewart
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

Sounds like it, but the data handed to us didnt have sidewalks and roads,
driveways etc. Ottawa may have exported data from this file

On Oct 21, 2016 11:19 PM, "Stewart C. Russell"  wrote:

> On 2016-10-20 10:37 AM, James wrote:
> >
> > We seem to be turning in a circle around "building source data is not
> > publicly available"
>
> These might be the source data:
>  http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data
> Unfortunately, it's a 3+ GB archive of DWG files that has taken nearly
> two hours to partly download, so I can't tell you if it matches your
> transformed data yet.
>
>  Stewart
>
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Stewart C. Russell]

On 2016-10-20 10:37 AM, James wrote:
> 
> We seem to be turning in a circle around "building source data is not
> publicly available"

These might be the source data:
 http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset/cad-topographic-data
Unfortunately, it's a 3+ GB archive of DWG files that has taken nearly
two hours to partly download, so I can't tell you if it matches your
transformed data yet.

 Stewart


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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

>   Commitment to follow the rules
> 
> Please ensure that any documentation contains a commitment to follow the
> Import/Guidelines
>  and Automated
> Edits code of conduct
> .
> These are non-negotiable parts of participation in OSM imports. The
> Ottawa import very definitely falls under the definition of an Automated
> Edit.

Actually... I don't think this should be requirement. Import
guidelines are not a holy text, people should follow them, but...
what is next. Should they also include a poem explaining how
import guidelines are great and make openstreetmap more useful?

> While it is generally considered that OGL-CA is acceptable to OSM, the
> lingering third-party waiver issue is troubling. As the City of Ottawa
> almost certainly relied on third parties to collect and correct the

While you may find it troubling, requiring such waivers is going to
make imports impossible. (And openstreetmap useless).

>   Data deletion
> 
> While you will likely be able to show that some imported outlines are
> more accurate than existing tracings, please don't delete/overwrite
> community contributions. Also, under *no* circumstances delete

So you suggest we keep less accurate data in openstreetmap,
because...?

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Denis Carriere]

I agree as well, we should be careful not to delete the history of the OSM
features.

It does take longer in the dense areas of the city, however in the rural
areas it's not a concern since there just isn't any buildings what so ever.

Great comment & concern,

*~~*
*Denis Carriere*
*GIS Software & Systems Specialist*

*Twitter: @DenisCarriere *
*OSM: DenisCarriere *
GitHub: DenisCarriere 
Email: carriere.de...@gmail.com

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:17 PM, James  wrote:

> I agree with Pavel (about the guidelines being considered to be followed
> to a T, when guidelines by definition are what should be done)
>
> As for Ottawa relying on external sources to collect data/correct the
> data. Ottawa has a GIS team and surveyors and do said work internally. So
> they do own 100% of the data they are outputting.
>
> Pavel, I don't think it's a matter of keeping less accurate data vs not
> keeping it, it's more keeping the history attached to the object. If
> someone put many hours into initially making a map (say from 2008) and
> someone comes a long 8 years later and deletes it, you are no longer
> credited to the contribution of that object(I can see, now, why people were
> angry)
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> >   Commitment to follow the rules
>> >
>> > Please ensure that any documentation contains a commitment to follow the
>> > Import/Guidelines
>> >  and Automated
>> > Edits code of conduct
>> > .
>> > These are non-negotiable parts of participation in OSM imports. The
>> > Ottawa import very definitely falls under the definition of an Automated
>> > Edit.
>>
>> Actually... I don't think this should be requirement. Import
>> guidelines are not a holy text, people should follow them, but...
>> what is next. Should they also include a poem explaining how
>> import guidelines are great and make openstreetmap more useful?
>>
>> > While it is generally considered that OGL-CA is acceptable to OSM, the
>> > lingering third-party waiver issue is troubling. As the City of Ottawa
>> > almost certainly relied on third parties to collect and correct the
>>
>> While you may find it troubling, requiring such waivers is going to
>> make imports impossible. (And openstreetmap useless).
>>
>> >   Data deletion
>> >
>> > While you will likely be able to show that some imported outlines are
>> > more accurate than existing tracings, please don't delete/overwrite
>> > community contributions. Also, under *no* circumstances delete
>>
>> So you suggest we keep less accurate data in openstreetmap,
>> because...?
>>
>>
>> Pavel
>> --
>> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
>> (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.c
>> z/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

I agree with Pavel (about the guidelines being considered to be followed to
a T, when guidelines by definition are what should be done)

As for Ottawa relying on external sources to collect data/correct the data.
Ottawa has a GIS team and surveyors and do said work internally. So they do
own 100% of the data they are outputting.

Pavel, I don't think it's a matter of keeping less accurate data vs not
keeping it, it's more keeping the history attached to the object. If
someone put many hours into initially making a map (say from 2008) and
someone comes a long 8 years later and deletes it, you are no longer
credited to the contribution of that object(I can see, now, why people were
angry)

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Pavel Machek  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> >   Commitment to follow the rules
> >
> > Please ensure that any documentation contains a commitment to follow the
> > Import/Guidelines
> >  and Automated
> > Edits code of conduct
> > .
> > These are non-negotiable parts of participation in OSM imports. The
> > Ottawa import very definitely falls under the definition of an Automated
> > Edit.
>
> Actually... I don't think this should be requirement. Import
> guidelines are not a holy text, people should follow them, but...
> what is next. Should they also include a poem explaining how
> import guidelines are great and make openstreetmap more useful?
>
> > While it is generally considered that OGL-CA is acceptable to OSM, the
> > lingering third-party waiver issue is troubling. As the City of Ottawa
> > almost certainly relied on third parties to collect and correct the
>
> While you may find it troubling, requiring such waivers is going to
> make imports impossible. (And openstreetmap useless).
>
> >   Data deletion
> >
> > While you will likely be able to show that some imported outlines are
> > more accurate than existing tracings, please don't delete/overwrite
> > community contributions. Also, under *no* circumstances delete
>
> So you suggest we keep less accurate data in openstreetmap,
> because...?
>
>
> Pavel
> --
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.
> cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
>


-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

I was wrong there is one sign up(i'm glad I drove there)
http://openstreetview.com/details/21585/18
See? no "ê".

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:37 AM, James  wrote:

> What is highly questionable about two levels of Government reaching out to
> the community to help them with complying/importing authoritative data? US
> has tiger data(I'm aware it's not the greatest example), Canada has
> (CanVec). Now we are down to a municipal level and the data(especially
> addresses that they maintain a database of for emergency services, etc) is
> incorrect and doesnt match real life. As for the building footprints I have
> addressed this already:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Canada:Ontario:
> Ottawa/Import/Plan#Data_quality
>
> We seem to be turning in a circle around "building source data is not
> publicly available", it's not because of it's held up by bureaucracy which
> is non-constructive. The source data was handed to StatsCan which we use as
> our source(I linked you the geojson that has 2 attributes added to it so
> JOSM wouldn't render a bunch of tagless ways and could make sense of it, if
> you want the original data: remove both tags).
>
> I completely understand that you don't want a bunch of garbage data added
> to OSM that will take years to clean up, neither do we, hell it's where we
> live and we'd be only punishing ourselves! The thing you have to understand
> is this preparation has been going for over a year now (see:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Canada:
> Ontario:Ottawa/Import=history(documentation started)). Even
> though we had an incompatible license, the data was still available to play
> with and analyse
>
> I get your concerns of problems that may arise during this import, this is
> what this process is for is it not? To address concerns people may have.
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:50 AM, James  wrote:
>
>> If you are complaining that it doesnt have "ê" you are going to have to
>> talk to the city of ottawa as that street does not have it(I know it I live
>> near there). There is no street sign as it is a private development. Take a
>> look at:
>> http://maps.ottawa.ca/geoottawa/
>> or google maps or even geobase roads(canvec) there is no "ê"
>> or even: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.47941/-75.52464
>>
>> Maybe you can create a language board as Québec did to control French
>> display, but in Ontario! (https://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/accueil.aspx)
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Christoph Hormann 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday 20 October 2016, James wrote:
>>> > Why are you linking a french wiki page of forest?
>>> >
>>> > Un Foret
>>> > Des Forets
>>> >
>>>
>>> I think it's "des forêts".
>>>
>>> Notice the difference?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christoph Hormann
>>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 外に遊びに行こう！
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

What is highly questionable about two levels of Government reaching out to
the community to help them with complying/importing authoritative data? US
has tiger data(I'm aware it's not the greatest example), Canada has
(CanVec). Now we are down to a municipal level and the data(especially
addresses that they maintain a database of for emergency services, etc) is
incorrect and doesnt match real life. As for the building footprints I have
addressed this already:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan#Data_quality

We seem to be turning in a circle around "building source data is not
publicly available", it's not because of it's held up by bureaucracy which
is non-constructive. The source data was handed to StatsCan which we use as
our source(I linked you the geojson that has 2 attributes added to it so
JOSM wouldn't render a bunch of tagless ways and could make sense of it, if
you want the original data: remove both tags).

I completely understand that you don't want a bunch of garbage data added
to OSM that will take years to clean up, neither do we, hell it's where we
live and we'd be only punishing ourselves! The thing you have to understand
is this preparation has been going for over a year now (see:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import=history
(documentation started)). Even though we had an incompatible license, the
data was still available to play with and analyse

I get your concerns of problems that may arise during this import, this is
what this process is for is it not? To address concerns people may have.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:50 AM, James  wrote:

> If you are complaining that it doesnt have "ê" you are going to have to
> talk to the city of ottawa as that street does not have it(I know it I live
> near there). There is no street sign as it is a private development. Take a
> look at:
> http://maps.ottawa.ca/geoottawa/
> or google maps or even geobase roads(canvec) there is no "ê"
> or even: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.47941/-75.52464
>
> Maybe you can create a language board as Québec did to control French
> display, but in Ontario! (https://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/accueil.aspx)
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Christoph Hormann 
> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 20 October 2016, James wrote:
>> > Why are you linking a french wiki page of forest?
>> >
>> > Un Foret
>> > Des Forets
>> >
>>
>> I think it's "des forêts".
>>
>> Notice the difference?
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

If you are complaining that it doesnt have "ê" you are going to have to
talk to the city of ottawa as that street does not have it(I know it I live
near there). There is no street sign as it is a private development. Take a
look at:
http://maps.ottawa.ca/geoottawa/
or google maps or even geobase roads(canvec) there is no "ê"
or even: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.47941/-75.52464

Maybe you can create a language board as Québec did to control French
display, but in Ontario! (https://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/accueil.aspx)

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Christoph Hormann 
wrote:

> On Thursday 20 October 2016, James wrote:
> > Why are you linking a french wiki page of forest?
> >
> > Un Foret
> > Des Forets
> >
>
> I think it's "des forêts".
>
> Notice the difference?
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

Christoph, the source data for buildings has 0 tags that need to be
translated as it is only building footprints and *0 attributes*. The source
on an Ottawa web site/federal website is non-existant for the time being
as: the city of ottawa litterally gave statscan a file on a flash drive to
deal with it: *this is precisely why I put background in the documentation
as the source for buildings will probably not be available from a official
website for years(judging how slow things move in the government)* you will
just have to accept that as it was handed to us from an official source the
two tags that were added were "building" and "source" polygon coordinates
are the same. If you really want I can strip all the
"properties":{"building":"yes","source":"City of Ottawa"}  and it will be
the same file. We are using this as the source. You will see that there are
1000s upon thousands of tiny garages/sheds and other junk we probably don't
need in the geojson I have linked.

St-Germain Crescent (Saint-Germain Crescent and yes it's written that
way(St-))
St-Emmanuel Terrace (Saint-Emmanuel Terrace and yes it's written that
way(St-))
Des Forets Avenue (What's wrong with this? There are french road names
especially in orleans "Des Forest" means Forests in English)
We are aware of Jeanne-D'Arc and have corrected it manually (there are a
handful of roads we've Identified as "problematic", all in Orleans (french
part of town they decided to put french and english together)




*There are discrepancies between the street names in the address nodes and
the road names in OSM by the way, mostly due to wrong names in OSM
(probably due to bad previous imports).*

O the city of ottawa feels it necessary to rename a couple
hundred roads per year and just hasnt been updated in OSM.
http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public-consultations/municipal-addressing/street-name-and-address-changes-update-october

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Christoph Hormann 
wrote:

> On Thursday 20 October 2016, James wrote:
> > If you really need source data it will be available when the
> > goverment makes up their mind where to host it. If you need it we
> > have it in GeoJSON format here:
> > https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/addxy.com/ottawa-buildings.geojson
>
> That is certainly not the source data, it looks like a simple geojson
> version of the OSM files.
>
> > Original file shouldn't matter anyways as it's full of errors to
> > begin with.
>
> As with the addresses the point is to assess the conversion process and
> the quality and suitability of the original data.  If you have fixed
> errors in this data this should be documented and reviewed as part of
> the import review.  What especially matters is the original metadata
> and specifications, like for example what a building is - something
> like a loading ramp/platform for example is not a building or part of a
> building in OSM but it might be in the source data set - which then
> would require special consideration.
>
> > As for addresses we have used a set of internal tools(available on
> > github) to rename and de-retard the original shape file like:
> > https://github.com/osmottawa/etl2osm
> > I also have a .net application at work that can do the same
> > processing.
>
> Overall this seems to work fine but it fails with some names like:
>
> St-Germain Crescent
> St-Emmanuel Terrace
> (unless this is the way it is written on the street signs of course)
>
> Des Forets Avenue
> Jeanne-d'Arc Boul. N. Boulevard North
>
> There are discrepancies between the street names in the address nodes
> and the road names in OSM by the way, mostly due to wrong names in OSM
> (probably due to bad previous imports).
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[Stewart C. Russell]

Please note my comments/concerns on the process here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan

copied below —


Initial Comments on Plan

It would be helpful if the plan were structured more like the Los
Angeles, California/Buildings Import

documentation. While it's not perfect (relying too much on off-OSM
resource like github), it does break up the documentation into helpful
sections.


  Commitment to follow the rules

Please ensure that any documentation contains a commitment to follow the
Import/Guidelines
 and Automated
Edits code of conduct
.
These are non-negotiable parts of participation in OSM imports. The
Ottawa import very definitely falls under the definition of an Automated
Edit.

As previous activities have been flagged by the Data working group
, it should be
assumed that every edit will now be watched and critiqued from afar.


  Licence

While it is generally considered that OGL-CA is acceptable to OSM, the
lingering third-party waiver issue is troubling. As the City of Ottawa
almost certainly relied on third parties to collect and correct the
data, what efforts have the importers made to ensure that OSMF would not
face legal claims if a third party could prove that their proprietary
data was mixed in with the import?

Please document the “considerable effort and research [that] was made to
ensure the licensing was correct”.


  Data permission

Please note that the Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Permission

link refers to incompatible data. You may wish to seek updated
permissions. All imports pre-dating the licence change (mid September
2016)

should be reverted, as they were done without following the import rules.


  Data availability

Please post a link to the original outline data and licence file. I
can't support an import of data that we can't inspect.


  Data schema

Please indicate how you will map the fields from the source data to OSM
tags. This is a very important part of the process, as it allows users
with import experience to make helpful suggestions.


  Data quality

If you wish to delete existing buildings, please prove that the city's
data is better. We've run into this problem before in Canada:
municipalities want to work with us, but only if we overwrite community
data with municipal GIS data. We couldn't accept that, as their data is
never better in all ways.


  Data deletion

While you will likely be able to show that some imported outlines are
more accurate than existing tracings, please don't delete/overwrite
community contributions. Also, under *no* circumstances delete anything
other than bad building outlines or erroneous address points. The
reverted import deleted Address Interpolation
 ways
(example: Way History: 69590585
) that other OSM
users rely upon.


  Process comments

  *

The three stage “Import Buildings/Import Addresses/Merge Addresses”
process appears cumbersome. Could the import and merge stages be
combined offsite, rather than adding lots of edit history?

  *

What steps are you taking to avoid address point duplication? Other
municipal imports may have addressed this and have tools available
to help.

  *

Is it correct to assume that address points outside a building can
be moved over a building?


  OSMCanada

I'm unfamiliar with this term. Who are OSMCanada? Do they claim special
standing? I do hope that no representations have been made to the City
of Ottawa or Statistics Canada that “OSMCanada” have authority to import
data or speak for OSM process beyond being who we all are: just some
people who happen to contribute to OSM.


  How can we help?

The Ottawa/Gatineau import pilot shows great potential. With wider
community discussion, it could be a paragon of OSM/Government
interaction. How can we help move this process along after community
concerns are addressed? --Scruss
 (talk
) 04:23, 20
October 2016 (UTC)



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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

If you really need source data it will be available when the goverment
makes up their mind where to host it. If you need it we have it in GeoJSON
format here:
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/addxy.com/ottawa-buildings.geojson

Original file shouldn't matter anyways as it's full of errors to begin with.

As for addresses we have used a set of internal tools(available on github)
to rename and de-retard the original shape file like:
https://github.com/osmottawa/etl2osm
I also have a .net application at work that can do the same processing.

When we were doing the import (was 96% complete before being reverted) at
no point did I see any address that couldn't be determined with the help of
Bing and Mapbox satelite imagery combined. This is why we are working with
experienced users, not mappers that started yesterday. This is why we have
it under risks with a mitigation:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan#Risks
The advantage of working with the local mappers is that if they need a
survey to fix data before import.

Building geometry is compared to properly offset Bing or Mapbox imagery,
which can be aligned using the building data as it is properly aligned and
traced from 30cm imagery dead overhead and not at a 5-20 degree incline
like a lot of satellite imagery.

This is not a pump and dump operation. Every tile tasked via the tasking
manager will be corrected of 1. Errors (JOSM Validator) 2. Addresses will
be properly set overhead of building(buildings that might need terracing)
or merged (single buildings and simpler terracing). *IN NO WAY SHAPE OR
FORM IS THIS A AUTOMATED IMPORT*. It is more like a HOT task, using data
available to us. Errors will be corrected before upload to OSM and before
marking a tile as "done" or "validated"

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Christoph Hormann 
wrote:

> On Wednesday 19 October 2016, James wrote:
> > Ok, Christoph now that I am at a proper computer I can address your
> > comments:
> > [...]
>
> Thanks for the additional information.  Based on this i modify my
> comments, what i am still missing is:
>
> - link to the source data for the buildings
> - information on attribute and geometry processing - this refers to how
> the source data is processed to generate the OSM files.  Based on the
> address data this is clearly non-trivial and needs further explanation
> (expansion of abbreviations, conversion of upper case names).
> - information on what you actually intend to import - please forgive me
> for not taking the time to scrape every data tile from
> data.osmcanada.ca to determine the extent of the data.
>
> Additional notes:
>
> - the address data is clearly not ready for import in the current form,
> it contains lots of duplicate addresses and positions seem pretty far
> off in some cases, often too far to be properly matched with buildings
> without on-the-ground inspection.
>
> - the building geometries contain various flaws like poor
> orthogonalization, overlaps and impossible geometries like here:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.32737/-75.70919
>
> and systematic errors like here:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.32802/-75.71617
>
> - it is unclear how you intend to determine which building geometry is
> more accurate if there is already data in OSM.
>
> > If you are just going to skim over documentation, what is the point
> > of creating it?
>
> The purpose is to document the import to allow mappers to look up how
> this particular import is done.  If finding out a specific detail about
> it - like for example to determine how the value of a certain tag is
> determined or which area exactly is affected by the import - requires
> you to read the full text from top to bottom, it does not fulfill this
> purpose that well.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

Bjenk said he will send me the agreement Friday when he's back at the
office that will clear us for use of the data.

On Oct 19, 2016 5:01 PM, "James"  wrote:

> I will contact Bjenk to get the agreement between StatsCan and the city of
> Ottawa and update the permission as they have previously discussed
> licensing in OpenStreetMap with Ottawa's data and the result was that it
> was compatible
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Paul Norman  wrote:
>
>> On 10/19/2016 12:53 PM, James wrote:
>>
>> Does this count Paul?
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Im
>>> port/Permission
>>>
>>> As its in the plan
>>>
>>>
>> This is all about the old terms of use, not the current license, and does
>> not clearly give us permission to redistribute their data under the ODbL.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 外に遊びに行こう！
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] [Import] Ottawa Buildings & Addresses [Statistics Canada project]

[James]

I will contact Bjenk to get the agreement between StatsCan and the city of
Ottawa and update the permission as they have previously discussed
licensing in OpenStreetMap with Ottawa's data and the result was that it
was compatible

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Paul Norman  wrote:

> On 10/19/2016 12:53 PM, James wrote:
>
> Does this count Paul?
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/
>> Import/Permission
>>
>> As its in the plan
>>
>>
> This is all about the old terms of use, not the current license, and does
> not clearly give us permission to redistribute their data under the ODbL.
>
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca