Re: [Talk-ca] can I submit road data?

ey begin to go awry. I don't need to say it, but Kevin is correct: let TIGER be a lesson to OSM about imports, especially those done at very wide (national) scales in large geographic areas like Canada or USA. They are challenging to do well, but shouldn't be completely prohibited, but rathe

Re: [Talk-ca] Rail tagging in Canada: operator=* and reporting_marks=*

My apologies: the correct link is: https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Talk:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] Rail tagging in Canada: operator=* and reporting_marks=*

hime in to the Talk page if this matters to you. Thanks! SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Canada Post offices

lly useful, especially as wiki can (and does) give a "live status update report" when / as one might click on such a link to see a snapshot of the current scope of the query and the work done so far on it. "Rule #2" on OSM's wiki page: Have fun! SteveA __

Re: [Talk-ca] Canada Post offices

lly as the OT code promulgates through mailers and layers of 'net traffic. For example, here is the link for David's recent OT code: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/S3A It works. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org ht

Re: [Talk-ca] Building tags in Canada

consensus-based documentation of "how we do this" IS being used) be whacked down to where it IS realistic. One benefit from doing so is that low-hanging fruit, on a short menu, looks that much easier to achieve towards completion, and therefore might even make great results MORE

Re: [Talk-ca] Building tags in Canada

e of wiki, especially during a project that is still sort of "wet cement being mixed" (nothing wrong with that, it has to happen, it happens well now) please feel free to modify these values as you see fit. It was meant to be a starting point, may you continu

Re: [Talk-ca] [OpenStreetMap] Revision de l'attribut lcn=yes pour le Québec

s être vrais", aussi bien que les balises de OSM peuvent en tenir compte. Plusieurs balises OSM orientées cycle peuvent, devraient et doivent coexister. (S'il te plaît, pardonne à mon écolier français, je fais de mon mieux). SteveA Californie __

Re: [Talk-ca] lcn=yes et RM20

De plus, je recommande que la balise cycle_network soit utilisée pour identifier le réseau particulier dont la route fait partie. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Pertinence de lcn=yes pour le Québec

t;Route de vélo" (mais pas de numéro ni de réseau), soit constituent un puits sans équivoque itinéraire cyclable connu (généralement local). SteveA Californie ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

And several years later, here we are. I'm glad to see such a "new arrival" at a place where good data can meet a good crowdsourced mapping database, and furthermore, I wish the project all good luck. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing

Re: [Talk-ca] Open Data for Airdrie AB

nationwide building data to properly and further enter OSM.  Good luck with your efforts, I genuinely mean that.Best regards,SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

. One province at a time. Pretty soon, after a few revisions of data and back-and-forths between municipalities and province-wide data checking, you've got something. There, you go. SteveA > On Mar 27, 2019, at 8:23 PM, keith hartley wrote: > > The patchwork of municipalities is

Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building outlines for Canada

hough I agree that achieving consensus on a nationwide import can be (and often is) quite difficult. I'm not trolling here, I wish to be encouraging and have decided to go crawl back under my rock for awhile to pursue other OSM endeavors (south of our border). C

Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building outlines for Canada

us results. Be heartened and courageous, be optimistic and visionary. If or as you don't, others will (and already have). Keep up the good work, everybody! SteveA (who usually doesn't like to be simply a cheerleader, though sometimes it helps) > On Mar 2, 2019, at 4:33 PM, John Whelan wrot

Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building outlines for Canada

ple "step up" like that, wider, open communication (here in talk-ca, the wiki page, the wiki's Discussion tab / talk page...) is also to be encouraged. In short, you can't cast the net too wide, so be broad in the reach to do so. De-centralize while developing both breadth and wid

Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building outlines for Canada

for letting us know here that the data are ODbL and therefore OSM-compatible. (One down, perhaps a bit more to go). SteveA > On Mar 2, 2019, at 2:40 PM, john whelan wrote: > > Why are you planning to import it? > > Cheerio John > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 5:26 P

Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building outlines for Canada

A responsible complement to this would be a link to license information, a wiki page about these data, and perhaps an Import Plan should those data actually be asserted to be worthy of being responsibly imported into OSM. SteveA California > On Mar 2, 2019, at 2:17 PM, john whelan wr

Re: [Talk-ca] Some feedback on import quality in Toronto

hn, Danny, so many others here unnamed have shown leadership. Many Canadians seem on the road to "how" and "talk amongst yourselves." Good is not the enemy. Good are good enough as they are included with "how." Thumbs up from here

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import update

I dislike sounding simply "like a cheerleader," here however, I am deeply encouraged by what I see as substantial progress. This sort of discussion bodes very well for the future of the import. Keep up the good work! SteveA On Feb 3, 2019, at 3:26 PM, john whelan wrote: > I

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import update

John) peut offrir ce type de caractérisation. SteveA On Feb 3, 2019, at 11:42 AM, Pierre Béland via Talk-ca wrote: > De tes exemples sortis du chapeau ne font pas avancer la discussion. > > J'attends la démonstration de John que les données d'import pour Ottawa > représente

Re: [Talk-ca] Some feedback on import quality in Toronto

r encouragement to this process, it does appear to continue here and can likely bear fruit in the near future. Keep going! Consensus is ahead! SteveA On Feb 3, 2019, at 10:55 AM, john whelan wrote: > So I suggest that you name yourself as the coordinator on the wiki page for > Toronto

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import update

hey will (slowly, there are a LOT!) begin to be imported into OSM. Or not. It is a maxim of good project management which is often unstated, yet now is the time to say it: "Lead, follow or get out of the way." SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import update

ort: "what's wrong with these data, how might they get fixed?" (Then they might get imported). It doesn't seem to me to be a whole lot more complicated a discussion than that. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] OSM Canada building import

ab ("Talk page") of the link above seems more appropriate. (And, I'd prefer to "get out of the way" here, if anybody were to go so far as to feel "get lost, already, SteveA," I wouldn't be offended, though I remain watching this Import for that grea

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import update

positively drive forward this import. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] OSM Canada building import

rt wiki, part community building, mostly discussion, agreement and therefore, consensus. > California Steve has put forward some proposals in the 2020 page of the wiki > which to me amount to minor variations on what we were doing. The intent > always was to involve local mappe

[Talk-ca] Building Import update

Hold" or "Stopped" status. Nice going, Canada! See you later, SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Place Tagging

ide" is something to consider. This isn't alway black-and-white, nor easy. As we "do our best," things eventually emerge as correct, though it usually takes some time and effort to get there. (Consensus does). SteveA ___ Talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Place Tagging

ken scheme is to tag Harriston and Palmerston as place=suburb, and > create a place=town node for Minto. In addition to me posting this, I'd simply say "read existing wiki documentation," as well as "keep talking about it" (whether in private emails, the Discussion tab on

Re: [Talk-ca] Canada Building imports wiki page

t;don't do this in talk-ca" I am saying "there are often more-appropriate (vs. less-appropriate) places to have a discussion to achieve consensus." Sometimes, it makes sense to have an off-list email conversation in a one-on-one or one-on-many fashion. Thanks. SteveA California > On

Re: [Talk-ca] 2020 building import wiki comment by Nate Wessel

with memory options > (Xms, Xmx), or it will crap out at 3.5GB > > On Sat., Jan. 19, 2019, 5:13 p.m. OSM Volunteer stevea > On Jan 19, 2019, at 2:01 PM, James wrote: > > Is there no one that will analyse the data I've posted here? > > https://drive.google.com/file/d

Re: [Talk-ca] 2020 building import wiki comment by Nate Wessel

s monster. Maybe some of ARE email thread warriors, but I am not "just" an email thread warrior. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] 2020 building import

On Jan 19, 2019, at 1:22 PM, john whelan wrote: > As a point of information the 2020 web page I think was started by Julia and > very heavily edited by Stevea. Sure I did, because it seriously lacked in the technical direction anybody would need to "map going forward" in the pr

Re: [Talk-ca] (no subject)

w these to the provincial level with good communication coordinating (wiki, Discussion pages within them, Task Manager, and talk-ca if necessary). Especially as the data are now "in the wild," the snowball is starting to roll downhill, gathering mass and speed. Course-correct when necessary and GROW this process as and how it is successful. Voila, a successful, nationwide massive import (project). It will be messy, it always is, but "deal with it" and you can get there. Good luck, Canada. Many believe in this and want to see it succeed (me included, despite what some might think is a sour or exasperated tone). SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Ongoing Canadian building import needs to be stopped, possibly reverted

f it as "a solid B" which might be "passes the class for now" without failing. And it's good we develop a "meanwhile strategy" to take it to 99% and then 100% in the (near- or at most mid-term) future. This isn't outrageously difficult, though it does take patience and

Re: [Talk-ca] Ongoing Canadian building import needs to be stopped, possibly reverted

The thread link is: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2019-January/005878.html SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Ongoing Canadian building import needs to be stopped, possibly reverted

(Again). This starts with good, open communication. Nothing less will do, or you consign your project to a whispered hope upon the wind, and that won't do it. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Exit with name on node *and* destination

c, je choisis de partager un "lien de partage OT:" http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DrG Good luck / bonne chance, SteveA California > As Overpass Turbo allows named area geocoding, try this: > Comme Overpass Turbo permet le géocodage de zone nommée, essayez ceci: > > [out:x

Re: [Talk-ca] Exit with name on node *and* destination

codeArea:Quebec}}->.searchArea; ( way["service"="emergency_access"](area.searchArea); ); out meta; >; out meta qt; You can modify what is inside the "way" part of the query any way you like. Vous pouvez modifier le contenu de la partie "way" de la req

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

yes, I do know that "you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar." (No, that isn't a slight at calling anybody "flies," rather a saying that means "positive encouragement works much better than throwing rocks"). SteveA California __

Re: [Talk-ca] Stats Canada new building outlines Open Data do we wish to import it?

dataset, to do so would be overwhelming) which overlap with the "official datasets" will be conflated. That is a critical step. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Stats Canada new building outlines Open Data do we wish to import it?

chiers de formes de construction sont déjà téléchargées vers OSM, à quelques rares exceptions près ou lorsqu'un très faible pourcentage de les bâtiments existants ne diffèrent que d'un mètre ou deux. Tout plan d'importation doit tenir compte de la manière dont ces données seront regroupées. Cordialement

Re: [Talk-ca] Enablers and Barriers for Voluntary Participation in Crowdsourcing Platforms

dicated and high-skills leadership within the crowd and directly supporting these (usually quite few) people, enabling them with the ability to slightly modify rules, offer seminars/educational curricula or even direct towards them carefully-identified financial support

Re: [Talk-ca] Nova Scotia imports, and boundary=land_area

ibes the project in general or stands on its own as a separate wiki. But it is required. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Open Database of Buildings / Base de données ouvertes sur les immeubles

Additionally, the greater OSM community looks forward to your Import Plan that follows our Import Guidelines ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines ). Regards, SteveA California > On Nov 1, 2018, at 11:22 AM, John Whelan wrote: > > I think on the OSM side we prob

Re: [Talk-ca] Dartmouthmapmaker

and many other sources of advice/documentation/help are available, too. Regards. SteveA California > On Nov 1, 2018, at 9:40 AM, john whelan wrote: > I've discussed the Open Data side with them but I think they could do with a > bit of guidence on the tagging side. Could someone ideally m

Re: [Talk-ca] Hydro Network (inland water) question

et better. It takes time, it takes dedication, it takes good communication, it takes people working well together. Largely speaking (and Canada isn't large, it's HUGE!), so far, so good. Encouragingly, SteveA California > On Sep 27, 2018, at 4:42 PM, john whelan wrote: > Besides bus

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: BC2020i - update Sept 2018

like that." Like learning to walk, it is a process, it isn't that hard, and it does come naturally. SteveA On Sep 17, 2018, at 12:16 PM, john whelan wrote: > Just a comment Alessandro is not a dedicated project manager but rather the > person that the project manager reports to. Currently in a

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: BC2020i - update Sept 2018

and should continue this dialog. Please, let's do our best to keep it civil. SteveA > On Sep 17, 2018, at 8:31 AM, Alasia, Alessandro (STATCAN) > wrote: (a reply to my missive) ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: BC2020i - update Sept 2018

Matthew, I personally thank you for sharing Alessandro's missive with talk-ca (an OSM-based list).However, Alessandro mentions "BC2020i" (and even "BC2020i-2"), initiatives which "used" (or proposed to "use") OSM as a data repository.  Not wishing to rehash history about this yet again, the

Re: [Talk-ca] counting buildings - ( 2020 project ) - help please.

nk you for your thoughts and hopefully the answers will clarify what sort > of assistance I'm after. You are welcome, and I'll be curious to watch what happens. As I saw your request for feedback is to be off-list, we who are on-list (I speak f

Re: [Talk-ca] counting buildings - ( 2020 project ) - help please.

mentation. Have fun, SteveA California > On Sep 12, 2018, at 10:39 AM, john whelan wrote: (a lot about how hard it is to query our data). ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] GitHub app for BC2020i Challenge

On Sep 6, 2018, at 4:30 PM, john whelan wrote: > The pilot project itself did manage to get a fair amount of accurate data > into OSM. That data is still there and can be used. It was instrumental in > supporting the HOT summit in Ottawa. It managed to raise awareness within > local

Re: [Talk-ca] GitHub app for BC2020i Challenge

On Sep 6, 2018, at 1:14 PM, john whelan wrote (replying to me, stevea): > > Hm, we tried to revive the wiki, a tried-and-true OSM methodology for doing > > EXACTLY that. Is there something wrong with that idea? > > No this project was initiated by Stats Canada, but without

Re: [Talk-ca] GitHub app for BC2020i Challenge

ot; (it DOES mention Active Monitoring tools) and "what tags are of interest" (it DOES mention Tag Standardization" and "The data that could be mapped"), then HOW? The answer: (or at least an excellent one): use our already-built, well-establishe

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

r d’OSM et continueraient d’atteindre cet objectif. Bonne journée, Etienne Californie > On Aug 12, 2018, at 4:59 PM, James wrote: > > Résumé très facile: Paris ou la france ≠ Le Québec. > Le Québec fait les chose très différente de la France. > > On Sun., Aug. 12, 2018, 8:36 p.m. OSM

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

Ayant embarqué à bord de nombreux trains à Paris (pour choisir l'une des nombreuses villes que j'ai embarquées dans les trains), OSM aux Halles dit "operator=RATP" et "name=RER B". Certains disent que la pure consistance est stupide. Je dis "trouver ce qui fonctionne et rester cohérent".

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

e's how WE do it" and "here's how we AND OUR NEIGHBORS do it" makes sense for trains and bus schedules and bike routes. Or don't. These things really are international and good dialog makes good protocols. We're simply people talking on a mailing list; I happen to believe

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

eally can get the phones to connect and the trains running on time, the ideas behind "let's agree on good language and tagging..." work, this is simply being good neighbors. A big human family sharing a map acts like a big human family sharing a map. We seem to continue to do t

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

ry good or even excellent and well-thought out and discussed, as are developing public_transport OSM data in Canada. We're making a great map. Thank you again for spirited and interesting discussion. SteveA California > On Jul 16, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Damien Riegel wrote: > > On 12 July 2018 at

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

rgely in agreement: if you (and Canada) want to move into the direction of putting operator=* on freight rail (and maybe sometimes passenger rail), yes, that seems correct. If you additionally want to use the network=* key for, in this example, STM, yes, that makes perfect sense to me as well. So

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

ot;Société de transport de Montréal" exactly right too (twice), making it a good candidate value for the name=* key. SteveA California > On Jul 10, 2018, at 7:22 PM, Damien Riegel wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > I'm new to this list so please forgive me if this topic h

Re: [Talk-ca] A new available source of trail data in the Nanaimo area

now "smarten up" your phone or GPS with these named trails and very precise geo data. OSM: what a great project! SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 Calgary Challenges and Best Practices

nning JOSM on a Mac, I hope. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names in Ontario

of this I'm spouting about "Township" can be ignored, as it is effectively another word to describe an admin_level=8 entity and you seem to be fine leaving things that way. Regards, SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names (Jarek Piórkowski)

is not a standard well kept. And we make our point: OSM doesn't always follow its own rules. Crowdsourcing can be messy, yet we try to improve day by day. Thanks to all for getting here! SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

Thank you, Matthew. As I said, "slavishly follow rules," no, not necessarily. "Understand the issues," yes, through good dialog. I like what I see here, it allows good consensus to emerge, tedious and perhaps even a bit annoying as it may be. :-) SteveA On Feb 19, 2018,

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names in Ontario

-up/thumbs-down, need a touch-up. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

uot; to "Sainte" in the Ontario version). Some (many? most?) "Sainte-Quelque Chose" names have hyphens, too. So, hm. That would be my approach, as it is OSM's approach. This is OSM, yet it is Canada, too, of course. It's not always easy or clear, is it? SteveA _

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

We call it TALK-ca for a reason! We call it OPENStreetMap for a reason! Consensus doesn't always come easy! Thanks to everyone for good discussion. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

I stand corrected, thank you everybody. BTW I do my best not to abbreviate thinks like "DC" for District of Columbia, but I now better understand that "St." in many cases has now truly become the official name, abbreviation included. SteveA

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

We (the USA) has many sources which "say" St. Louis (Missouri) but OSM has name=Saint Louis. The latter is correct in an OSM context. Following our wiki, CAN the name be spelled without an abbreviation?" If yes, then please do so. Thanks, SteveA > On Feb 16, 2018,

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

f (trade off?) of "well, let's capture the data we consider deleting by adding them into OSM using OSM methods." This isn't required, more like a "recycle the scraps on the cutting room floor into nice, correct data." I do that where I can, certainly not always! Great discussion. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

r, Kevin Farrugia says something different. We listen, we consider, we allow consensus to emerge and the bold pull triggers. By that I mean "clean up what we now agree needs correcting." OSM is so delightfully human and organic. I'm so glad we so widely speak amongst ourselves. SteveA

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

tart small, document it. That seems a fairly low bar to step over. Later, SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

Please see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:level SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

e more difficulties. It is getting better. (As my tone hews closer to honey than vinegar, it will get better). Again, I've said it and said it and said it. So please: do it. The good intentions to do so are clearly there, that is a terrific place to be to continue onto the next steps. SteveA

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

and transparent, not (exclusively) "fail fast." In fact, OSM insists upon this. Please install pilots in your large, jet aircraft. If it is to fly and land at its destination (years into the future), it not only deserves, it simply must have an experienced flight crew.

Re: [Talk-ca] Preferred phone number format

nd with maybe a eight or ten rules, (reasonable for a parser extracting machine-dialble phone numbers, if necessary), you're either done or at or above 99%, I'd be willing to wager (and I'm not a betting type, though I do play poker with friends and online). Nice job. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

On Jan 29, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-29 04:37 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> >> OSM is delighted to receive building data in Canada, truly we are. >> (Provided they are high-quality data). I have heard the process o

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

Um, "dyed-in-the-wool." Steve ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

eeds the most rudimentary structure of project management, badly, and right now. Previous experience with national-level/wide scope projects in OSM is quite helpful, but only died-in-the-wool OSM volunteers need "apply" (themselves). Sincerely, SteveA OSM Volunteer since 2009 ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

OK, I've redacted Halifax changes. From four to three (municipalities with license now "green.") Steve > On Jan 28, 2018, at 7:39 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2018-01-28 09:16 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> Halifax also looks lik

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

lities, now. Thanks to great teamwork for a productive weekend, everybody. See you around. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 project

And...you're off and running (better and better). This is a process, everybody. Nobody wants to be slapping anybody around. I like the way we've been polite and patient with each other here. Regards, SteveA > On Jan 28, 2018, at 4:47 PM, Matthew Darwin <matt...@mdarwin.ca> wrote: &g

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

Smiling here, thank you for wiki-ing fresher status in both wikis! (It's quite doable, yes?). Steve > On Jan 28, 2018, at 3:40 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > Great, seems like we have a list of 3 ok ones: > Ottawa (approved license) > Gatineau + Montreal (explicit approval

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

or... are more appropriate. I'm saying "wiki when wiki is right." SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

erstanding up and down our wiki, toolchains, processes, lines of communication, etc. A sort of thing that is done on a talk page and via wikis. It appears to be a national conversation. Steady ahead. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] BC2020 perspectives

towards Open Data with the culture of OSM. We have made great progress, but in my opinion, only in limited contexts and suffering from "stove-piped" communication blockages. This deeply frustrates further progress. Please observe all of the moving parts, (perhaps marvel a bit!) and know t

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

right now. Please! We seem to be getting somewhere, even if it is determining that "efforts remain unconfused and confused on a national level." I'll take that as minor progress — because it can be cleaned up and remedied! Thank you to all for measured, patient and polite con

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

ative to move forward with these and I'm left with little to do from here to push it forward any differently than I have been. Thank you, SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 26, 2018, at 8:12 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-26 09:56 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> What I did was to "back-populate" the list of "approved" (by whom? when? >> how did these get here?) list of Canadian

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

main in motion, dialog to continue and good work to continue. Including the solid task of planting acorns so that mighty oaks may grow. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

account) can change these to be more accurate! Capturing ADDITIONAL status harmonization with whatever might be going on in OSM-CA-TM is an ongoing bit of work to be done which appears to be only in the most early of contemplation/discussion. SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

o toddling to walking: excellent. Happy weekend everyone, SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10

nce in OSM, that sounds like a conversation, as we have here in talk-ca. Yes, so, we're having it. Part in talk-ca, part in the wiki, part in the map, part in email, part in the real world over coffee and talk. More in the wiki, please? Thanks, it feels like my work is done here! SteveA Califo

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

ization and project (links, wikis, mapping work...) connectivity (intra-OSM, as it were) goes a long way. Nice working with you! > Keep up the great work. Thanks, you and BC2020 (and Canadians OSMers and all of OSM and all the little children...), too. SteveA California _

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

mebody" or "walled garden." It's OSM, after all. We use other forms of communication, but on a national project of scope this large, we can (and should and do) use the wiki. Zippin' it closed for a while, SteveA California ___

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

seems an appropriate place to learn that. Yet our wiki updated with those links took me about twenty seconds of cut-and-paste. Yeah! SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

  1   2   >