Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

2020-01-18 Thread john whelan
Sounds very reasonable to me. Thanks John On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 20:02, Nate Wessel wrote: > In short, yes. But we should give them a clear option and a clear path > toward doing it either way - written procedures, provide preprocessing > scripts/help, etc. > > Best, > > Nate Wessel, PhD >

Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

2020-01-18 Thread Nate Wessel
In short, yes. But we should give them a clear option and a clear path toward doing it either way - written procedures, provide preprocessing scripts/help, etc. Best, Nate Wessel, PhD Planner, Cartographer, Transport Nerd NateWessel.com On 2020-01-18 7:37 p.m.,

Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

2020-01-18 Thread john whelan via Talk-ca
> But also - sorry this is such a long email - we certainly should not be manually doing re-conflation where buildings are very dense (e.g. downtown Toronto) or where they have already been imported extensively (much of the rest of the GTA). The import plan I'm working on for Toronto will take

Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

2020-01-18 Thread Nate Wessel
Hi all, Daniel, thanks for continuing to prod the conversation along :-) I guess the point of disagreement here is that I generally don't agree that the ODB buildings are of higher quality than what's already in OSM. The ODB data I've seen is quite messy, and IMO only marginally better than

Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

2020-01-18 Thread Daniel @jfd553
Bonjour groupe, Here is a sequential summary of the last exchanges. I inserted some comments […] within these exchanges description and summarize what I understand from it at the end. Nate asked not to confuse the process of importing new data with that of updating/modifying existing OSM data