Re: [Talk-ca] importing data requiring attribution

Alan, Dang! I thought I was close.I had SCRD fix their cut-and-paste error and agree that an addition to the OSM' Contributors page would be adequate for attribution.I'll see if I can get them to add something similar. Maybe I should contact the OSM Licensing Working Group first.

Re: [Talk-ca] importing data requiring attribution

For reference, here's the full email and response I got, in case it helps others with similar requests: Hi, > I tried sending this through the feedback form on the Open Data site, but > it was too long for the form and my shorter inquiry was never responded to. > Given the upcoming HackOurCity

Re: [Talk-ca] importing data requiring attribution

>From what I've seen so far, the opinion seems to be that the OGL-BC devived licenses like this one require a statement about the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. This was done for the City of Vancouver license, and I've just recently recieved an update from the City of New

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 109, Issue 13

ps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map> Unless CSDs are physically observable, they are too abstract for OSM.  Stewart ------ next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20170307/68f24873/attachment-000

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

+1 Kevin again :) Boundaries are a MUST if ever you want better geocoding. We just need to deconflict the boundaries that are different from StatsCan & the local municipalities (these boundaries should be "authoritative" if they exist). Remember, not all townships have a full GIS team working

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Sorry JP, just talking from my experience in Ontario where they generally (at least in Southern Ontario) follow legal boundaries.  In the end, whoever does it will need to have knowledge of the area and how boundaries work in that province/locality, but boundaries are definitely important for

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Well noted. Maybe we could start a project out of it a later time with everyone in this thread. It will require research and preparation. B Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 7, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Denis Carriere wrote: > > I just want to re-enforce the comment that Kevin

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

And even then, not all CSDs are municipalities. In Nova Scotia for instance they have "county subdivisions" which have no legal standing at all and are just StatsCan creations. I'd suggest boundaries of actual municipalities are worthy of being added into OSM, but not all CSDs fit that bill.

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Hey Stewart, CSDs are legal boundaries - I.e. the legal boundary of a lower tier municipality. CSD = city/town/township Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. Original message From: "Stewart C. Russell" Date: 2017-03-07 1:05 PM (GMT-05:00) To:

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

CSDs are suppose to represent city/town limits (observable as usually there's a sign that says Welcome to X or Sorry to see you leave X), but they have been rounded off to look nice and may not reflect what it is in reality On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Stewart C. Russell

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

On 2017-03-07 10:36 AM, Bjenk Ellefsen wrote: > > … Any more thoughts? If you're planning to import/add abstract statistical boundaries, rather than those defined by municipal boundaries, then I'd suggest that they don't belong in OSM. “Contributions to OpenStreetmap should be: 1. Truthful

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

I just want to re-enforce the comment that Kevin Farrugia made. Boundaries are one of the most complex features to add in OpenStreetMap. They usually consist of relations that share borders with roads/rivers/other boundaries. If ever there is an import of boundaries, the users doing the import

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

James, it looks to me those differences are the result of a simplification applied on the processing side. And I also agree that good enough is usually more problems down the road. We should adopt a standard. The only one I know of for the country is the SGC and Paul is pointing out to an example

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Quebec's Open Data portal just points to the city portals which each have their own license(usually CC-BY) https://www.donneesquebec.ca/fr/ On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:42 AM, James wrote: > We also have to think if we are going with "good enough" when we want > better

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

We also have to think if we are going with "good enough" when we want better the work that will be doubled to make the boundaries better. On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote: > Municipalities are creatures of the provinces, the most likely source of

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Municipalities are creatures of the provinces, the most likely source of complete, correct municipal boundaries will be the provincial government, though each municipality will generally know theirs (and sometimes disagree with neighbours, hence the utility of using a provincial file if

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Bjenk, I was on the same impression that CSD did (used to) not always match municipal limits because of their objective (census) since in some case it would not make sense to do so for statistical purpose… Daniel From: Bjenk Ellefsen [mailto:bjenk.ellef...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, 7 March,

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Sorry the image didnt copy properly: http://i.imgur.com/QwdQDzS.png On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:31 AM, James wrote: > In purple/black CSD 2016, in gold Gatineau's city limits from their open > data portal: > http://i.imgur.com/undefined.png > > The CSDs do not match up with

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

In purple/black CSD 2016, in gold Gatineau's city limits from their open data portal: http://i.imgur.com/undefined.png The CSDs do not match up with actual city bounds On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Bjenk Ellefsen wrote: > Just to make sure we are talking about the

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing: Census Divisions are higher level and more regional boundaries. CSDs are municipal boundaries (in OSM, level 8). http://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/subjects/standard/sgc/2011/sgc-intro Can you give me an example of city limits that don't match a

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Morning Bjenk, Just a heads up - municipal boundaries are best of they aren't just straight up imported because they're usually done as relations. For example, we generally add roads into the boundary relationship rather than overlapping boundary and roads. Here's one I did before:

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Bernie, I've also noticed that StatsCan boundaries seem to be a generalization of an area vs the actual city limits On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Bernie Connors wrote: > Bjenk, > > In NB there are issues with some census boundaries not matching with > our

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Bjenk,      In NB there are issues with some census boundaries not matching with our administrative boundaries. The issue I am aware of was with the county boundaries. The census data that is analogous to our

Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Depends what boundaries you are talking about: City limits(admin_level=8) there are a few(usually main cities) as for neighbourhoods (admin_level=9) they are a rarity. On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Bjenk Ellefsen wrote: > Hello, > > Municipal boundaries correspond to

[Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries

Hello, Municipal boundaries correspond to census subdivisions (CSD). I have seen that many municipalities do not have a boundary yet. Is it ok if I start adding some boundaries based on CSDs? Having the boundaries is important to make extractions and analysis at the municipal level. Bjenk