Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-28 Thread Pierre Béland 
Un autre sujet non traité dans courriel précédent
Bornes kilometriques sur les routes forestières
Les services de secours et les routiers utilisent les bornes kilométriques pour 
référence où ils sontex km 150.
Comment pourrions-nous ajouter une telle information à la carte? On peut 
utiliser sur une node highwayhighway=milestonedistance=150  
ref=km 150
Cependant cette info n'apparait pas sur les cartes. Devrions-nous plutôt 
utilisername=km 150 ?  
Pierre 



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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-28 Thread Pierre Béland 
Nous devons comme communauté nous préoccuper d'ajouter des infos utiles et que 
nous pourons mettre à jour. Nous devons de structurer, classifier ces infos 
pour qu'elles soient utiles.
À titre d'exemple, au Québec seulement il y a plus de 300,000 km de routes 
forestières (routes principales) et chemins forestiers (chemins de collecte de 
bois accessibles surtout avec équipement spécialisé). Ce réseau est plus 
important que le réseau routier du Ministère des Transports.

Sauf pour quelques excpeptions, le réseau du Ministère des transports est 
classifié de 
1 à 99 Autoroutes100 à 399 (Routes secondaires). 
400 et plus Routes forestières. 

Pour quelques routes forestières on retrouve une double classification qui 
correspond sans doute à ancienne - nouvelle classification 
Route forestière 450 (anciennement 10 ? ) et Route forestière 461 (anciennement 
25 ? )
A noter qu'il existe des autoroutes numérotées 10 et 25.
Les routes forestières sont déja assez bien tracées. 

Par contre, il serait important de s'assurer d'ajouter systématiquement la clé 
ref pour la numérotation des routes. Pour le Québec, je propose d'utiliser la 
nomenclature du Ministère des transports utilisée sur les cartes par région 
administrative et de nommer spécifiquement ces routes Route forestière.

Exemple 
name= Route forestière  400  ref=R0400name= Route forestière  450 
(10)   ref=R0450
name= Route forestière  461 (25)   ref=R0461
name= Route forestière 1009 ref=R1009

Au Québec les routes forestières sont sous la responsabilité du Ministère des 
ressources naturelles. Les cartes routières par région administrative 
contiennent la numérotation des routes forestières.  Vous allez me dire, 
problème de licence. Ces infos sont déja sur Google. Entente spéciale?, les 
cartes interactives du gouvernement du Québec utilisant Google comme carte de 
base. Quelqu'un peut dire si nous avons accès à ces infos avec licence 
compatible OSM?

En ce qui a trait aux chemins forestiers, ceux-ci sont souvent temporaires et 
non entretenus. Le lien ci-dessous montre une carte publiée par la forestière 
Resolute. On voit le dédale de chemins forestiers et les nombreux ponts non 
accessibles. 
http://www.pfresolu.com/uploadedFiles/Sustainability/Forestry_and_Fiber_Sourcing(1)/Certification_by_Operation/Cote-Nord-Chemins_forestiers_UAF09351_Centre-Nord.pdf
 
 
Pierre 


  De : John Marshall <rps...@gmail.com>
 À : James <james2...@gmail.com>; Talk-CA OpenStreetMap 
<talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> 
 Envoyé le : mardi 28 juin 2016 14h39
 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
   
I agree with James and Michael . How could we prevent logging roads from being 
mapped anyway.All roads should be mapped.  The same would apply to Military 
Bases. Most of the time the public is not allowed on the Base. But there are 
times when the public is allowed on  hunting ect where having the data would be 
useful.John MarshallOn Jun 26, 2016 17:37, "James" <james2...@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree with Michael. What happens if fire services need to use that road or 
emergency services like ambulence etc. It should be the application's job to 
determine in which condition a road should or shouldnt be used, not the mappers 
job to obfuscate the map

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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-28 Thread John Marshall 
I agree with James and Michael . How could we prevent logging roads from
being mapped anyway.

All roads should be mapped.

The same would apply to Military Bases. Most of the time the public is not
allowed on the Base. But there are times when the public is allowed on
hunting ect where having the data would be useful.

John Marshall
On Jun 26, 2016 17:37, "James" <james2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with Michael. What happens if fire services need to use that road
> or emergency services like ambulence etc. It should be the application's
> job to determine in which condition a road should or shouldnt be used, not
> the mappers job to obfuscate the map
> On Jun 25, 2016 4:01 PM, "Michael Zajac" <mich...@zajac.ca> wrote:
>
>> The map shows what’s there. Hopefully it can also show private- or
>> public-access status, but its job is not to babysit potential trespassers
>> by keeping parts of the landscape secret.
>>
>>
>> Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] wrote:
>>
>> > Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look
>> large, and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic
>> along them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless
>> you have authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the
>> controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you
>> need to get out of the way of.
>> >
>> > CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access
>> roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
>> >
>> > While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to
>> use them.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Zajac
>> http://zajac.ca/
>> +1-204-943-6596
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 2016-06-25, at 13:52, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
>> >
>> > Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
>> >   talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> >
>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> >   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> >   talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org
>> >
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at
>> >   talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org
>> >
>> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> > than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
>> >
>> >
>> > Today's Topics:
>> >
>> >   1. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Alan Richards)
>> >   2. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Pierre Béland)
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Message: 1
>> > Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:31:42 + (UTC)
>> > From: Alan Richards <alarob...@gmail.com>
>> > To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, Kevin Farrugia
>> >   <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
>> > Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
>> > Message-ID:
>> >   <
>> 1311b39aa81e624e.ad0720c3-33a3-4256-87d1-d01909f9b...@mail.outlook.com>
>> >
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> >
>> > Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by
>> private logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority
>> are on crown land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary
>> wildly and roads are often unmaintained if active logging is not in
>> progress in the area.
>> > While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical
>> intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc.
>> >
>> > Alan (alarobric)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who
>> these open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in
>> other provinces?
>> > Martijn
>> > On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Morning everyone,
>> > I was looking at information on one of the Province's ima

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-27 Thread Pierre Béland 
J'ai lu un peu pour mieux comprendre ce réseau de routes forestières. 



Nous pourrions proposer une classiffication particulière highway=forest_road.
Au Québec, ce réseau est plus long que le réseau des routes standard. Et il a 
des règles particulières. Des camions hors-normes y circulent (14 pieds de 
largeur) et ne peuvent s'arrêter rapidement avec le chargement lourd qu'ils 
transportent. Ils ont priorité et on doit s'annoncer à l'aide d'un CB en 
donnant sa direction et le kilomètre où on se trouve.  Je n'ai pas réussi à 
trouver une carte particulière.
Cet article d'un journaliste circulant avec un forestier résume bien la 
situation.http://www.lemondeforestier.ca/blog/km-54-en-montant-pick-up
  
Pierre 


  De : James <james2...@gmail.com>
 À : Pierre Béland <pierz...@yahoo.fr> 
Cc : Michael Zajac <mich...@zajac.ca>; Talk-CA OpenStreetMap 
<talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
 Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juin 2016 19h02
 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
  
Pierre that's why you describe what state the road is in, weither it be a 
highway=track or highway=unknown or highway=tiertiary. As long as I can 
distinguish two tire tracks, to me it's a roadPierre c'est pour ca on devrait 
décrire les routes que ca soit highway=track ou highway=unknown ou 
highway=tiertiary. En autant que je puisse voir deux traces de roues, pour moi 
c'est une rue.On Jun 26, 2016 6:57 PM, "Pierre Béland" <pierz...@yahoo.fr> 
wrote:

Question urgencs, on doit aussi se demander quelles seraient les clés à ajouter 
pour bien décrire les difficutés rencontrées sur ces route- surface - minimum 
4x4 ou pickup?- sécurité vs véhicules lourds- approvisionnements et essence 
souvent absents  
Pierre 


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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-26 Thread James 
Pierre that's why you describe what state the road is in, weither it be a
highway=track or highway=unknown or highway=tiertiary. As long as I can
distinguish two tire tracks, to me it's a road

Pierre c'est pour ca on devrait décrire les routes que ca soit
highway=track ou highway=unknown ou highway=tiertiary. En autant que je
puisse voir deux traces de roues, pour moi c'est une rue.
On Jun 26, 2016 6:57 PM, "Pierre Béland" <pierz...@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Question urgencs, on doit aussi se demander quelles seraient les clés à
> ajouter pour bien décrire les difficutés rencontrées sur ces route
> - surface - minimum 4x4 ou pickup?
> - sécurité vs véhicules lourds
> - approvisionnements et essence souvent absents
>
>
> Pierre
>
>
> --
> *De :* James <james2...@gmail.com>
> *À :* Michael Zajac <mich...@zajac.ca>
> *Cc :* Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> *Envoyé le :* Dimanche 26 juin 2016 17h35
> *Objet :* Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
>
> I agree with Michael. What happens if fire services need to use that road
> or emergency services like ambulence etc. It should be the application's
> job to determine in which condition a road should or shouldnt be used, not
> the mappers job to obfuscate the map
> On Jun 25, 2016 4:01 PM, "Michael Zajac" <mich...@zajac.ca> wrote:
>
> The map shows what’s there. Hopefully it can also show private- or
> public-access status, but its job is not to babysit potential trespassers
> by keeping parts of the landscape secret.
>
>
> Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] wrote:
>
> > Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large,
> and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along
> them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you
> have authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the
> controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you
> need to get out of the way of.
> >
> > CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access
> roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
> >
> > While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to
> use them.
>
> --
> Michael Zajac
> http://zajac.ca/
> +1-204-943-6596
>
>
>
> > On 2016-06-25, at 13:52, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> >
> > Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
> >   talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >   talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >   talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Alan Richards)
> >   2. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Pierre Béland)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:31:42 + (UTC)
> > From: Alan Richards <alarob...@gmail.com>
> > To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, Kevin Farrugia
> >   <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
> > Message-ID:
> >   <
> 1311b39aa81e624e.ad0720c3-33a3-4256-87d1-d01909f9b...@mail.outlook.com>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by
> private logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority
> are on crown land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary
> wildly and roads are often unmaintained if active logging is not in
> progress in the area.
> > While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical
> intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc.
> >
> > Alan (alarobric)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who
> these open data

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-26 Thread Pierre Béland 
Question urgencs, on doit aussi se demander quelles seraient les clés à ajouter 
pour bien décrire les difficutés rencontrées sur ces route- surface - minimum 
4x4 ou pickup?- sécurité vs véhicules lourds- approvisionnements et essence 
souvent absents  
Pierre 


  De : James <james2...@gmail.com>
 À : Michael Zajac <mich...@zajac.ca> 
Cc : Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
 Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juin 2016 17h35
 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
   
I agree with Michael. What happens if fire services need to use that road or 
emergency services like ambulence etc. It should be the application's job to 
determine in which condition a road should or shouldnt be used, not the mappers 
job to obfuscate the mapOn Jun 25, 2016 4:01 PM, "Michael Zajac" 
<mich...@zajac.ca> wrote:

The map shows what’s there. Hopefully it can also show private- or 
public-access status, but its job is not to babysit potential trespassers by 
keeping parts of the landscape secret.


Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] wrote:

> Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, and 
> make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along them 
> could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you have 
> authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the controller 
> won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you need to get out 
> of the way of.
>
> CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access roads in 
> Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
>
> While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to use 
> them.

--
Michael Zajac
http://zajac.ca/
+1-204-943-6596



> On 2016-06-25, at 13:52, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
>
> Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
>       talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Alan Richards)
>   2. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Pierre Béland)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:31:42 + (UTC)
> From: Alan Richards <alarob...@gmail.com>
> To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, Kevin Farrugia
>       <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
> Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
> Message-ID:
>       <1311b39aa81e624e.ad0720c3-33a3-4256-87d1-d01909f9b...@mail.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by private 
> logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority are on 
> crown land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary wildly and 
> roads are often unmaintained if active logging is not in progress in the area.
> While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical 
> intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc.
>
> Alan (alarobric)
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org> 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who these 
> open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in other 
> provinces?
> Martijn
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Morning everyone,
> I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs 
> (SWOOP: 
> https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf)
>  and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province 
> but the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where I 
> work.  However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright 
> because it says the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the 
> holder of the Crown's copyrights in Ontario.
> If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if they 
> can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data openly 
> under the Open Government Directive as a WMS/

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-26 Thread James 
I agree with Michael. What happens if fire services need to use that road
or emergency services like ambulence etc. It should be the application's
job to determine in which condition a road should or shouldnt be used, not
the mappers job to obfuscate the map
On Jun 25, 2016 4:01 PM, "Michael Zajac" <mich...@zajac.ca> wrote:

> The map shows what’s there. Hopefully it can also show private- or
> public-access status, but its job is not to babysit potential trespassers
> by keeping parts of the landscape secret.
>
>
> Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] wrote:
>
> > Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large,
> and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along
> them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you
> have authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the
> controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you
> need to get out of the way of.
> >
> > CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access
> roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
> >
> > While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to
> use them.
>
> --
> Michael Zajac
> http://zajac.ca/
> +1-204-943-6596
>
>
>
> > On 2016-06-25, at 13:52, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> >
> > Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
> >   talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >   talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >   talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Alan Richards)
> >   2. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Pierre Béland)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:31:42 + (UTC)
> > From: Alan Richards <alarob...@gmail.com>
> > To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, Kevin Farrugia
> >   <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
> > Message-ID:
> >   <
> 1311b39aa81e624e.ad0720c3-33a3-4256-87d1-d01909f9b...@mail.outlook.com>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by
> private logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority
> are on crown land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary
> wildly and roads are often unmaintained if active logging is not in
> progress in the area.
> > While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical
> intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc.
> >
> > Alan (alarobric)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who
> these open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in
> other provinces?
> > Martijn
> > On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Morning everyone,
> > I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs
> (SWOOP:
> https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf)
> and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province
> but the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where
> I work.  However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright
> because it says the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the
> holder of the Crown's copyrights in Ontario.
> > If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if
> they can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data
> openly under the Open Government Directive as a WMS/TIFFs or you can lodge
> a FIPPA request to have it released (I don't know how this affects you or
> us being ab

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Michael Zajac 
The map shows what’s there. Hopefully it can also show private- or 
public-access status, but its job is not to babysit potential trespassers by 
keeping parts of the landscape secret.


Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] wrote:

> Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, and 
> make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along them 
> could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you have 
> authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the controller 
> won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you need to get out 
> of the way of.
> 
> CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access roads in 
> Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
> 
> While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to use 
> them.

--
Michael Zajac
http://zajac.ca/
+1-204-943-6596



> On 2016-06-25, at 13:52, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> 
> Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
>   talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Alan Richards)
>   2. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Pierre Béland)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:31:42 + (UTC)
> From: Alan Richards <alarob...@gmail.com>
> To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, Kevin Farrugia
>   <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
> Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
> Message-ID:
>   <1311b39aa81e624e.ad0720c3-33a3-4256-87d1-d01909f9b...@mail.outlook.com>
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by private 
> logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority are on 
> crown land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary wildly and 
> roads are often unmaintained if active logging is not in progress in the 
> area. 
> While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical 
> intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc. 
> 
> Alan (alarobric)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who these 
> open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in other 
> provinces?
> Martijn
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Morning everyone,
> I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs 
> (SWOOP: 
> https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf)
>  and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province 
> but the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where I 
> work.  However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright 
> because it says the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the 
> holder of the Crown's copyrights in Ontario.
> If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if they 
> can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data openly 
> under the Open Government Directive as a WMS/TIFFs or you can lodge a FIPPA 
> request to have it released (I don't know how this affects you or us being 
> able to use it in OSM, however).
> You can check out what their imagery looks like here to see if it's worth 
> your time contacting them: 
> http://www.giscoeapp.lrc.gov.on.ca/matm/Index.html?site=Make_A_Topographic_Map=MATM=en-US
>  (in Map Layers turn off Topographic Data to see the imagery).
> -Kevin (Kevo)
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Missing access=no and access=private tags I understand...
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> 
> From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com]
> 
> Sent: June-24-16 22:45
> 
> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> 
&

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Pierre Béland 
Au Québec comme en Colombie-Britannique et sans doute dans les autres 
provinces, ce sont effectivement des routes publiques construites et utilisées 
principalement pour le transport du bois. Il est possible d'y circuer pour des 
activités récréatives telles chasse et pêche. Cependant, les camions remorque 
lourdement chargés roulent vite, au milieu de la route et projettent des 
cailloux. ! La surface peut aussi être inégale. Plusieurs utilisent des 
véhicules 4x4 jugeant trop risqué d'utiliser une voiture.

Il est difficile de classifier ces routes, de décrire l'état de la route et les 
risques associés.   Des contributeurs à distance avec un projet Maproulette 
n'auraient pas l'info adéquate pour classifier ces routes et y ajouter les clés 
adéquates pour décrire l'état de ces routes. 
Pierre 


  De : Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>
 À : Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> 
Cc : "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
 Envoyé le : samedi 25 juin 2016 10h53
 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
   
Should we assume that a reasonable amount of these private or even dangerous 
routes have been mapped as public, potentially routable? What would be a good 
way to inspect these? Do we have reference data on these logging roads? A 
MapRoulette challenge could be useful.
Martijn

On Jun 24, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large,
and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic
along them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and
unless you have authorization and the right radio to call in the
checkpoints, the controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck
coming that you need to get out of the way of.

CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access
roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to
use them.



___
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] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Alan Richards 
Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by private 
logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority are on crown 
land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary wildly and roads 
are often unmaintained if active logging is not in progress in the area. 
While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical 
intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc. 

Alan (alarobric)




On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org> 
wrote:










Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who these 
open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in other 
provinces?
Martijn
On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> wrote:
Morning everyone,
I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs (SWOOP: 
https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf)
 and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province but 
the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where I work.  
However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright because it says 
the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the holder of the Crown's 
copyrights in Ontario.
If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if they 
can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data openly under 
the Open Government Directive as a WMS/TIFFs or you can lodge a FIPPA request 
to have it released (I don't know how this affects you or us being able to use 
it in OSM, however).
You can check out what their imagery looks like here to see if it's worth your 
time contacting them: 
http://www.giscoeapp.lrc.gov.on.ca/matm/Index.html?site=Make_A_Topographic_Map=MATM=en-US
 (in Map Layers turn off Topographic Data to see the imagery).
-Kevin (Kevo)



On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Missing access=no and access=private tags I understand...

Daniel



-Original Message-

From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com]

Sent: June-24-16 22:45

To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org

Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads



On 2016-06-23 10:26 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:

>

> Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber

> areas. Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars.



Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, and 
make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along them 
could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you have 
authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the controller 
won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you need to get out of 
the way of.



CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access roads in 
Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .

While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to use them.



cheers,

 Stewart



___

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



___
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] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Martijn van Exel 
Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who these 
open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in other 
provinces?

Martijn

> On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Morning everyone,
> 
> I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs 
> (SWOOP: 
> https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf
>  
> <https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf>)
>  and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province 
> but the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where I 
> work.  However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright 
> because it says the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the 
> holder of the Crown's copyrights in Ontario.
> 
> If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if they 
> can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data openly 
> under the Open Government Directive as a WMS/TIFFs or you can lodge a FIPPA 
> request to have it released (I don't know how this affects you or us being 
> able to use it in OSM, however).
> 
> You can check out what their imagery looks like here to see if it's worth 
> your time contacting them: 
> http://www.giscoeapp.lrc.gov.on.ca/matm/Index.html?site=Make_A_Topographic_Map=MATM=en-US
>  
> <http://www.giscoeapp.lrc.gov.on.ca/matm/Index.html?site=Make_A_Topographic_Map=MATM=en-US>
>  (in Map Layers turn off Topographic Data to see the imagery).
> 
> -Kevin (Kevo)
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com 
> <mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
> Missing access=no and access=private tags I understand...
> Daniel
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com <mailto:scr...@gmail.com>]
> Sent: June-24-16 22:45
> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
> 
> On 2016-06-23 10:26 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> >
> > Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber
> > areas. Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars.
> 
> Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, and 
> make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along them 
> could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you have 
> authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the controller 
> won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you need to get out 
> of the way of.
> 
> CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access roads in 
> Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427> .
> While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to use 
> them.
> 
> cheers,
>  Stewart
> 
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca 
> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca 
> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca>
> 
> ___
> 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] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Martijn van Exel 
Should we assume that a reasonable amount of these private or even dangerous 
routes have been mapped as public, potentially routable? What would be a good 
way to inspect these? Do we have reference data on these logging roads? A 
MapRoulette challenge could be useful.

Martijn

> On Jun 24, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Stewart C. Russell  wrote:
> 
> Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large,
> and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic
> along them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and
> unless you have authorization and the right radio to call in the
> checkpoints, the controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck
> coming that you need to get out of the way of.
> 
> CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access
> roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 
>  .
> While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to
> use them.

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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Kevin Farrugia 
Morning everyone,

I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs
(SWOOP:
https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf)
and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province
but the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where
I work.  However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright
because it says the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the
holder of the Crown's copyrights in Ontario.

If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if
they can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data
openly under the Open Government Directive as a WMS/TIFFs or you can lodge
a FIPPA request to have it released (I don't know how this affects you or
us being able to use it in OSM, however).

You can check out what their imagery looks like here to see if it's worth
your time contacting them:
http://www.giscoeapp.lrc.gov.on.ca/matm/Index.html?site=Make_A_Topographic_Map=MATM=en-US
(in Map Layers turn off Topographic Data to see the imagery).

-Kevin (Kevo)


On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Missing access=no and access=private tags I understand...
> Daniel
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: June-24-16 22:45
> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
>
> On 2016-06-23 10:26 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> >
> > Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber
> > areas. Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars.
>
> Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large,
> and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along
> them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you
> have authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the
> controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you
> need to get out of the way of.
>
> CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access roads
> in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
> While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to use
> them.
>
> cheers,
>  Stewart
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-25 Thread Begin Daniel 
Missing access=no and access=private tags I understand...
Daniel

-Original Message-
From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: June-24-16 22:45
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

On 2016-06-23 10:26 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> 
> Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber 
> areas. Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars.

Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, and 
make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along them 
could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you have 
authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the controller 
won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you need to get out of 
the way of.

CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access roads in 
Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to use them.

cheers,
 Stewart

___
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] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-24 Thread Stewart C. Russell 
On 2016-06-23 10:26 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> 
> Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber
> areas. Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars.

Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large,
and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic
along them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and
unless you have authorization and the right radio to call in the
checkpoints, the controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck
coming that you need to get out of the way of.

CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access
roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 .
While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to
use them.

cheers,
 Stewart

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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-23 Thread Pierre Béland 
Hi Martijn,
There is Canadian provincial/federal government agreement to provide updated 
data on various structures including roads. Other then the Canvec, we have 
access to the Geobase road database. This is quite complete, including road 
names, but might miss very recent roads. See "Route Geobase" in the CA section 
of the Imagery providers. This complete very well imageries such as Bing and 
MapBox.
Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber areas. 
Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars.
 
Pierre 


  De : Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>
 À : Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> 
Cc : talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
 Envoyé le : jeudi 23 juin 2016 14h00
 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
   
Hi Stewart, all, 

>From talking to some Canadian (provincial and local) government agency folks 
>at a conference recently I got the sense that the open data landscape is 
>pretty different than here in the US (which is again very different from most 
>places in Europe where I am from originally).

The aerial route seems tricky from what you’re telling me. Unless we get access 
to a more up to date commercial resource. I wonder what opportunities the more 
recent versions of Canvec / Canvec+ road layers offer to find and complete 
newer roads in OSM. Has there been much effort into looking at that? The OSM 
folks here at Telenav where I work have built a conflation engine that may help 
integrate newer data into OSM and we could try that out on a smaller area.

Martijn

> On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Martijn,
> 
>> I am wondering if you know of any more recent aerial imagery that may be
>> available? Or other suggestions to fill in these missing roads? (We have
>> found many, many cases in Canada alone)
> 
> We don't have a national mapping agency in Canada that gives everything
> away for free. Aerial imagery is typically carried out every couple of
> years by the provinces, but in agricultural areas only. This is not free
> and tends to cost anything from $10-150 / sq km just to see. Coverage is
> spotty, and depends on the province's priorities.
> 
> Within 10 miles of the Great Lakes (so, not in your example) we used to
> have access to wonderful USGS imagery. We can no longer see it in
> Canada, although I suspect the images are still collected and may be
> geofenced. Can't have free data getting in the way of Provincial cost
> recovery, can we?
> 
> cheers,
> Stewart
> 
> 
> ___
> 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


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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-23 Thread Martijn van Exel 
Hi Stewart, all, 

From talking to some Canadian (provincial and local) government agency folks at 
a conference recently I got the sense that the open data landscape is pretty 
different than here in the US (which is again very different from most places 
in Europe where I am from originally).

The aerial route seems tricky from what you’re telling me. Unless we get access 
to a more up to date commercial resource. I wonder what opportunities the more 
recent versions of Canvec / Canvec+ road layers offer to find and complete 
newer roads in OSM. Has there been much effort into looking at that? The OSM 
folks here at Telenav where I work have built a conflation engine that may help 
integrate newer data into OSM and we could try that out on a smaller area.

Martijn

> On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Stewart C. Russell  wrote:
> 
> Hi Martijn,
> 
>> I am wondering if you know of any more recent aerial imagery that may be
>> available? Or other suggestions to fill in these missing roads? (We have
>> found many, many cases in Canada alone)
> 
> We don't have a national mapping agency in Canada that gives everything
> away for free. Aerial imagery is typically carried out every couple of
> years by the provinces, but in agricultural areas only. This is not free
> and tends to cost anything from $10-150 / sq km just to see. Coverage is
> spotty, and depends on the province's priorities.
> 
> Within 10 miles of the Great Lakes (so, not in your example) we used to
> have access to wonderful USGS imagery. We can no longer see it in
> Canada, although I suspect the images are still collected and may be
> geofenced. Can't have free data getting in the way of Provincial cost
> recovery, can we?
> 
> cheers,
> Stewart
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-22 Thread Stewart C. Russell 
Hi Martijn,

> I am wondering if you know of any more recent aerial imagery that may be
> available? Or other suggestions to fill in these missing roads? (We have
> found many, many cases in Canada alone)

We don't have a national mapping agency in Canada that gives everything
away for free. Aerial imagery is typically carried out every couple of
years by the provinces, but in agricultural areas only. This is not free
and tends to cost anything from $10-150 / sq km just to see. Coverage is
spotty, and depends on the province's priorities.

Within 10 miles of the Great Lakes (so, not in your example) we used to
have access to wonderful USGS imagery. We can no longer see it in
Canada, although I suspect the images are still collected and may be
geofenced. Can't have free data getting in the way of Provincial cost
recovery, can we?

cheers,
 Stewart


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

Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-22 Thread Martijn van Exel 
Merci Daniel!
I can read French …ehm.. okay but don’t know it well enough to write. So feel 
free to respond in French, and I will probably be able to make sense of it. 
Again my apologies!
Martijn

> On Jun 22, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Traduction en français …
> Salut à tous,
>  
> Excusez le message en anglais seulement, mon français est trop pauvre pour 
> être capable d'écrire quelque chose de cohérent.
>  
> Mes collègues de Telenav ont identifié un groupe de routes manquantes au 
> Canada. Celles-ci sont affichées sous forme de tuiles sur le site Web 
> ImproveOSM[1] et dans le plug-in ImproveOSM de l'application JOSM.
>  
> Le défi avec ces routes est que nous ne disposons pas toujours des images 
> aériennes pour nous permettre de cartographier ces dernières. Voici un 
> exemple [2].
>  
> Vous pouvez voir qu'il y a des travaux en cours, mais l'imagerie est trop 
> vieille pour nous montrer où les routes sont.
>  
> Je me demande si vous connaissez des images aériennes plus récentes qui 
> peuvent être disponibles? Ou d'autres suggestions pour remplir ces routes 
> manquantes? (Nous avons trouvé beaucoup, beaucoup de cas au Canada seulement)
>  
> Merci,
> Martijn
>  
>  
> From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org] 
> Sent: June-22-16 12:06
> To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
> Subject: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads
>  
> Hi all, 
>  
> Excuse my English only, my French is too poor to be able to write something 
> coherent. 
>  
> My colleagues at Telenav have identified a bunch of missing roads in Canada. 
> These are displayed as tiles on the improve-osm web site [1] and in the 
> ImproveOSM JOSM plugin.
>  
> The challenge with these is that we do not always have the aerial imagery to 
> allow us to map these. Here is an example [2].
>  
> You can see that there is construction going on but the imagery is too old to 
> show us where the roads are.
>  
> I am wondering if you know of any more recent aerial imagery that may be 
> available? Or other suggestions to fill in these missing roads? (We have 
> found many, many cases in Canada alone)
>  
> Thanks,
> Martijn
>  
> [1] See for example: 
> http://www.improve-osm.org/#48.3864397,-71.3031900,17/layer=OSM/OPEN/false,1-0-0/true,1-0-0-0-0/false,1-0
>  
> <http://www.improve-osm.org/#48.3864397,-71.3031900,17/layer=OSM/OPEN/false,1-0-0/true,1-0-0-0-0/false,1-0>
> [2] 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/0bt0yrc1ppmhdhj/Screenshot%202016-06-22%2009.10.21.png?dl=0
>  
> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/0bt0yrc1ppmhdhj/Screenshot%202016-06-22%2009.10.21.png?dl=0>
>  - this location in OSM: 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.29692/-114.08170 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.29692/-114.08170>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads

2016-06-22 Thread Martijn van Exel 
Hi all, 

Excuse my English only, my French is too poor to be able to write something 
coherent. 

My colleagues at Telenav have identified a bunch of missing roads in Canada. 
These are displayed as tiles on the improve-osm web site [1] and in the 
ImproveOSM JOSM plugin.

The challenge with these is that we do not always have the aerial imagery to 
allow us to map these. Here is an example [2].

You can see that there is construction going on but the imagery is too old to 
show us where the roads are.

I am wondering if you know of any more recent aerial imagery that may be 
available? Or other suggestions to fill in these missing roads? (We have found 
many, many cases in Canada alone)

Thanks,
Martijn

[1] See for example: 
http://www.improve-osm.org/#48.3864397,-71.3031900,17/layer=OSM/OPEN/false,1-0-0/true,1-0-0-0-0/false,1-0
 

[2] 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0bt0yrc1ppmhdhj/Screenshot%202016-06-22%2009.10.21.png?dl=0
 - this location in OSM: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.29692/-114.08170 
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca