Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread John Whelan
At the end of the day one would hope we are a community.  We are a large 
group with divergent opinions and to be honest there is a great deal of 
interest in non-mappers in this sort of data.


For example building data is being used in Tanzania to work out the 
optimal areas for group solar panels.  It can be used for many other 
things which may not be immediately apparent to a traditional paper 
based mapper.


With both the Stats Can released data and the Microsoft released data 
floating around some data is going to creep in anyway.


At the moment we have Tim taking responsibility for Montreal.

There seems to be a number of divergent views in Toronto so I think they 
should sit down and see if they can come to some sort of agreement.


We have Pierre and Nate who would appear to have different standards of 
what is acceptable to other mappers.  We have at least half a dozen 
mappers who support the import, shown by their imports. I can probably 
find a few more mappers who support the import if it comes to a simple vote.


I would suggest we try to best manage the process.  If that means the 
imported data is verified by another mapper I think that can be arranged.


Cheerio John

Yaro Shkvorets wrote on 2019-03-15 11:22 AM:
As an experienced local Ontario and Quebec mapper I don't see any 
major problems with Stats Can building quality. It's detailed and 
recent, it's the best dataset we could ever possibly get and it's far 
superior to Microsoft quality. Having many buildings with "almost 
square angles" in this dataset is not an issue as vast majority of 
such deviations cannot be seen with a naked eye. Unfortunately any 
orthogonalization algorithms will do more harm than good in such 
cases. Mapping for the Validator, just like mapping for the Renderer 
is a wrong way to map.
Issues were raised, issues were addressed in the import plan. If there 
are any problems with some mappers violating any specific import plan 
rules such issues need to be pointed out so they can adjust their 
workflow.

My 2 cents.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:55 AM Nate Wessel > wrote:


I just reported this to the data working group, in case you
haven't already. Hopefully they will step in!

Cheers,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban
Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 10:30 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:

Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de
DannyMcD_imports. Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.
voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901

There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the
extent that they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to
continue importing, unless a *specific* valid issue is raised.
Please do not contact me again unless you have such an issue.


La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.


Pierre



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



--
Best Regards,
          Yaro Shkvorets
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


--
Sent from Postbox 

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


Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread Yaro Shkvorets
As an experienced local Ontario and Quebec mapper I don't see any major
problems with Stats Can building quality. It's detailed and recent, it's
the best dataset we could ever possibly get and it's far superior to
Microsoft quality. Having many buildings with "almost square angles" in
this dataset is not an issue as vast majority of such deviations cannot be
seen with a naked eye. Unfortunately any orthogonalization algorithms will
do more harm than good in such cases. Mapping for the Validator, just like
mapping for the Renderer is a wrong way to map.
Issues were raised, issues were addressed in the import plan. If there are
any problems with some mappers violating any specific import plan rules
such issues need to be pointed out so they can adjust their workflow.
My 2 cents.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:55 AM Nate Wessel  wrote:

> I just reported this to the data working group, in case you haven't
> already. Hopefully they will step in!
>
> Cheers,
> Nate Wessel
> Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
> NateWessel.com 
>
> On 3/15/19 10:30 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:
>
> Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de DannyMcD_imports.
> Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.
> voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901
>
> There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the extent
> that they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to continue
> importing, unless a *specific* valid issue is raised. Please do not contact
> me again unless you have such an issue.
>
> La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.
>
>
> Pierre
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>


-- 
Best Regards,
  Yaro Shkvorets
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread Nate Wessel
I just reported this to the data working group, in case you haven't 
already. Hopefully they will step in!


Cheers,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 10:30 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:
Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de 
DannyMcD_imports. Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.

voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901

There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the 
extent that they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to 
continue importing, unless a *specific* valid issue is raised. Please 
do not contact me again unless you have such an issue.



La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.


Pierre


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


Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread Nate Wessel
Given the scale of this illicit import (thanks Pierre for the stats!), I 
would, yes, stick my neck out and say that I oppose this action as a 
Canadian mapper. Contributors who are clearly violating community norms 
about discussion and consensus do not constitute an implicit consensus 
of some local community. In the absence of a healthy local discussion 
about this, I think it's up to us to say that this needs to stop.


The tasking manager for this project should be taken down immediately. 
Whether they strictly need it to continue or not, they are (ab)using it 
and it's clearly helping them continue with an import that is being 
actively disputed.


Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 8:28 AM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

IMO the huron/hamptonavemapper import is quite clearly in active
disagreement with the import suspension - while I could believe that
one user could overlook clicking on the wiki link in their changeset
messages just once and seeing the bold "on hold", setting up a brand
new similarly named account on February 15, 2019 and immediately
starting to import suggests they know what they're doing. And it's not
like one ultimately _needs_ the tasking manager to insert the data.

The question is what are we going to do about it? Are you going to
speak for Alberta and BC in opposing this import, Nate? That's
defensible but also debatable.

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 21:12, Nate Wessel  wrote:

I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be locked or 
taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop people from importing 
when we don't have consensus is to not make it so easy for them. Indeed, I 
would find it plausible if these people said they didn't even know the import 
was paused - their evidence: that the tasking manager is still active!

Best,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com

On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
the OSM wiki.

I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.

http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
Alberta tasks.

It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
Meetup?)

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:

Wicked lad importing without an import plan?

Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.

Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.

I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, the 
Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan for 
the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import on 
the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to get 
buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  After a 
request from a local group then I think that particular area can proceed.

Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.

Thanks John

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
(most recent 5 days ago)?

I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
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] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread Pierre Béland via Talk-ca
Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de DannyMcD_imports. 
Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.voir 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901
| 
There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the extent that 
they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to continue importing, unless 
a *specific* valid issue is raised. Please do not contact me again unless you 
have such an issue.
 |


La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.
 
Pierre 
 

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


Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread Pierre Béland via Talk-ca
Bonjour Jarek
Ce n'est malheureusement pas le seul contributeur qui agit ainsi.  J'estime en 
divisant (Objets/5) que depuis le 1er février, 6 contributeurs ont importé près 
de 1 million de bâtiments. Selon les commentaires, 5 provinces ont été 
couvertes. Cette information est parfois inexacte. Un fichier json des bbox de 
chaque changeset nous fournirait une information plus précise.Voir par exemple 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67725913 
J'ai joint ci-dessous un tableau sommaire et la liste des changesets par 
contributeur.

Nous faisons face à un import massif. Ce ne sont pas des débutants qui font ces 
imports et ces contributeurs doivent justifier leurs actions depuis le début 
février et expliquer la méthode suivie pour corriger les données. 
Je viens juste d'aviser chacun de ces contributeurs de cesser les imports et 
venir en discuter sur la liste.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67725913
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68043362
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68112880
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67956418
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68131003

    Imports Statcan depuis le 1er février - Nombre d'objets par 
province

| 
 | OSM Uiid | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |
| Province | 215433 | 1919010 | 5214232 | 5323321 | 9266764 | 9444677 | Total |
| Alberta | 152 033 | 
 | 
 | 474 276 | 
 | 586 403 | 1 212 712 |
| BC | 44 115 | 
 | 
 | 1 833 617 | 
 | 506 552 | 2 384 284 |
| New Brunswick | 389 750 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 389 750 |
| Ontario | 
 | 2 758 | 
 | 
 | 470 608 | 
 | 473 366 |
| Québec | 297 444 | 
 | 110 484 | 753 | 
 | 
 | 408 681 |
| Total | 883 342 | 2 758 | 110 484 | 2 308 646 | 470 608 | 1 092 955 | 4 868 
793 |


Liste des changesets par contributeurUid 215433 Alberta 67665215, 67665288, 
67665341, 67665453, 67665483, 67665545, 67665602, 67665808, 67665875, 67666001, 
67666180, 67669204, 67669252, 67669308, 67669354, 67669452, 67669522, 67669613, 
67670220, 67670247, 67670273, 67670311, 67670349, 67670387, 67670421, 67670458, 
67670536, 67670908, 67670939BC 67508204, 67508256, 67508291, 67508458, 
67508490, 67508513, 67508622, 67508649, 67508697New Brunswick 67507944, 
67508112, 67508134, 67530245, 67530288, 67530337, 67530387, 67530430, 67530474, 
67530523, 67530791, 67530835, 67531044, 67531220, 67531330, 67531597, 67531938, 
67532009, 67532116, 67532730, 67532743, 67569125, 67569223, 67569803, 67569881, 
67569899, 67569919, 67569960, 67602916, 67603189, 67603261, 67603269, 67603307, 
67603335, 67603367, 67603432, 67603554, 67603678, 67603804, 67604023, 67604270, 
67604320, 6779, 67700103, 67700186, 67700343, 67701266, 67701566, 67704840, 
67704865, 67704907, 67705047, 67705069, 67705120, 67705156, 67705204, 67705284, 
67705553, 67705562, 67705602, 67705662, 67705703, 67705762, 67705815, 67705920, 
67705931, 67706273, 67706329, 67706346, 67706464, 67706503, 67706521, 67719310, 
67719682, 67720148, 67720387, 67720605, 67720722, 67720888, 67720980, 67721152, 
67721270, 67723337, 67724221, 67724317, 67724413, 67724441, 67724618, 67724667, 
67724722, 67724746, 67724785, 67724876, 67724959, 67725077, 67725194, 67725830, 
67725849, 67725878, 67725913, 67725961, 67787993Québec 67498534, 67498609, 
67498689, 67498757, 67498912, 67505394, 67505479, 67505545, 67505558, 67505578, 
67505614, 67505972, 67506005, 67506059, 67506089, 67506346, 67506485, 67506686, 
67506719, 67506875, 67506907, 67506934, 67506947, 67506976, 67507006, 67507027, 
67507041, 67507049, 67507068, 67507105, 67507117, 67507136, 67507160, 67507175, 
67507185, 67507195, 67507202, 67507216, 67507260, 67507285, 67507297, 67507312, 
67507320, 67507331, 67507344, 67507355, 67507356, 67507363, 67520439, 67520589, 
67521376, 67521445, 67521517, 67522086, 67522182, 67523774, 67523861, 67523987, 
67524091, 67524121, 67524132, 67524260, 67524661, 67524728, 67524805, 67525070, 
67525203, 67525335, 67525528, 67526340, 67526436, 67526514, 67526916, 67527123, 
67527293, 67527489, 67527970, 67528040, 67528316, 67528511, 67528581, 67528645, 
67528686, 67528728, 67528787, 67528860, 67528901, 67528967, 67529024, 67529042, 
67529077, 67529173, 67529225, 67529262, 67529307, 67529347, 67529374, 67529413
Uid 1919010 Ontario 68042707, 68042895, 68043362, 68043390, 68043779, 68043921, 
68044088
Uid 5214232 Québec 67957273, 67957348, 67957729, 67958923, 67959011, 67986700, 
67986777, 68069537, 68069649, 68078450, 68078523, 68112014, 68112112, 
68112880Uid 5323321 Alberta 66858409, 66858508, 66858697, 66931104, 66931208, 
66931808, 66932459, 66937105, 66944951, 66945388, 66945814, 66945894, 66946017, 
66946173, 66946358, 66960875, 66961117, 66961283, 66961447, 66962026, 66962184, 
66963495, 66963589, 67022393, 67033345, 67033434, 67033507, 67037604, 67037672, 
67037926, 67038133, 67046475, 67046558, 67046687, 67047191, 67047267, 67047343, 
67047419, 67048115, 67048188, 67048931, 67048997, 67049058, 67049627, 67050230, 
67050277, 

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread John Whelan
If the local mappers in Alberta or BC feel the data quality is not good 
enough then I think it is up to them to take action but I think it 
really is up to the local mapping community and defining them is 
difficult sometimes.  Also remember agreements within the local 
community are not always electronic in nature.


This is not as simple and clear cut as one might like.

Cheerio John

Jarek Piórkowski wrote on 2019-03-15 8:28 AM:

IMO the huron/hamptonavemapper import is quite clearly in active
disagreement with the import suspension - while I could believe that
one user could overlook clicking on the wiki link in their changeset
messages just once and seeing the bold "on hold", setting up a brand
new similarly named account on February 15, 2019 and immediately
starting to import suggests they know what they're doing. And it's not
like one ultimately _needs_ the tasking manager to insert the data.

The question is what are we going to do about it? Are you going to
speak for Alberta and BC in opposing this import, Nate? That's
defensible but also debatable.

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 21:12, Nate Wessel  wrote:

I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be locked or 
taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop people from importing 
when we don't have consensus is to not make it so easy for them. Indeed, I 
would find it plausible if these people said they didn't even know the import 
was paused - their evidence: that the tasking manager is still active!

Best,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com

On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
the OSM wiki.

I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.

http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
Alberta tasks.

It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
Meetup?)

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:

Wicked lad importing without an import plan?

Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.

Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.

I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, the 
Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan for 
the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import on 
the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to get 
buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  After a 
request from a local group then I think that particular area can proceed.

Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.

Thanks John

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
(most recent 5 days ago)?

I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
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


--
Sent from Postbox 

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


Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-15 Thread Jarek Piórkowski
IMO the huron/hamptonavemapper import is quite clearly in active
disagreement with the import suspension - while I could believe that
one user could overlook clicking on the wiki link in their changeset
messages just once and seeing the bold "on hold", setting up a brand
new similarly named account on February 15, 2019 and immediately
starting to import suggests they know what they're doing. And it's not
like one ultimately _needs_ the tasking manager to insert the data.

The question is what are we going to do about it? Are you going to
speak for Alberta and BC in opposing this import, Nate? That's
defensible but also debatable.

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 21:12, Nate Wessel  wrote:
>
> I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be locked or 
> taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop people from 
> importing when we don't have consensus is to not make it so easy for them. 
> Indeed, I would find it plausible if these people said they didn't even know 
> the import was paused - their evidence: that the tasking manager is still 
> active!
>
> Best,
>
> Nate Wessel
> Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
> NateWessel.com
>
> On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
> the OSM wiki.
>
> I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
> saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.
>
> http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
> Alberta tasks.
>
> It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
> community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
> countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
> the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
> Meetup?)
>
> --Jarek
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:
>
> Wicked lad importing without an import plan?
>
> Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.
>
> Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.
>
> I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, 
> the Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan 
> for the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import 
> on the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to 
> get buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  
> After a request from a local group then I think that particular area can 
> proceed.
>
> Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.
>
> Thanks John
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
>
> Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
> hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
> (most recent 5 days ago)?
>
> I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> 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] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-14 Thread Nate Wessel
I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be 
locked or taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop 
people from importing when we don't have consensus is to not make it so 
easy for them. Indeed, I would find it plausible if these people said 
they didn't even know the import was paused - their evidence: that the 
tasking manager is still active!


Best,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
the OSM wiki.

I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.

http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
Alberta tasks.

It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
Meetup?)

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:

Wicked lad importing without an import plan?

Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.

Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.

I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, the 
Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan for 
the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import on 
the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to get 
buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  After a 
request from a local group then I think that particular area can proceed.

Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.

Thanks John

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
(most recent 5 days ago)?

I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
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] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-14 Thread Jarek Piórkowski
The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
the OSM wiki.

I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.

http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
Alberta tasks.

It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
Meetup?)

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:
>
> Wicked lad importing without an import plan?
>
> Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.
>
> Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.
>
> I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, 
> the Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan 
> for the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import 
> on the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to 
> get buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  
> After a request from a local group then I think that particular area can 
> proceed.
>
> Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.
>
> Thanks John
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
>>
>> Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
>> hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
>> (most recent 5 days ago)?
>>
>> I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Jarek
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Building import in BC and Quebec

2019-03-14 Thread john whelan
Wicked lad importing without an import plan?

Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.

Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.

I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import,
the Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import
plan for the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to
import on the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the
locals are to get buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is
acceptable.  After a request from a local group then I think that
particular area can proceed.

Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.

Thanks John

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

> Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
> hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
> (most recent 5 days ago)?
>
> I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> 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