Re: [Talk-ca] FW: Building Import

2019-03-26 Thread Pierre Béland via Talk-ca
Piórkowski [mailto:ja...@piorkowski.ca] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 17:19 To: Begin Daniel; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] FW: Building Import Hi Daniel, If you are interested, some more potentially complicated areas around Golden Horseshoe for testing. Each is roughly one

Re: [Talk-ca] FW: Building Import

2019-03-26 Thread Begin Daniel
Piórkowski [mailto:ja...@piorkowski.ca] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 17:19 To: Begin Daniel; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] FW: Building Import Hi Daniel, If you are interested, some more potentially complicated areas around Golden Horseshoe for testing. Each is roughly one

[Talk-ca] FW: Building Import

2019-03-26 Thread Begin Daniel
As usual, missed the reply all … From: jfd...@hotmail.com Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 16:26 To: 'John Whelan' Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Building Import It is really kind to consider my background ;-) You are right regarding the "black box" approach; this is why a large approval from the

Re: [Talk-ca] FW: Building Import

2019-03-21 Thread John Whelan
I like the idea of building a consensus on a building import. More seriously if we can get any sort of consensus I'll be more than happy. Cheerio John Begin Daniel wrote on 2019-03-21 2:40 PM: Oups, I still miss the “reply all” button *From:*jfd...@hotmail.com *Sent:* Thursday, March

[Talk-ca] FW: Building Import

2019-03-21 Thread Begin Daniel
Oups, I still miss the "reply all" button From: jfd...@hotmail.com Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 14:36 To: 'Nate Wessel' Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Building Import Hi all, Concerning the pre-processing, let's try/check first the "orthogonalization" component then, if there is a consensus on