Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

[Eric Geiler]

Good Morning,

I’m eager to become a regular participant and contributor.

[EricGeiler-1]

From: John Whelan 
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2019 8:31 AM
To: Nate Wessel 
Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

I'm glad to see Toronto getting involved once more.

The original idea for using Open Data to import buildings followed on from a 
group of Toronto mappers who imported address information for a new sub 
division that was not available in CANVEC from Stats Canada after very 
carefully checking that the licenses etc aligned.

There was discussion in Talk-ca at the time before the import was done.

Cheerio John

Nate Wessel wrote on 2019-09-30 12:14 AM:


Hi Steve,

Thanks for posting the event! I just RSVPed.

I think a separate import event would probably be helpful - somewhere with wifi 
and outlets for laptops, probably not a bar. Perhaps we can book a meeting room 
at a public library or something?

I can poll some of the more active local editors to find a time that works well 
for people. Once we have a time and place it would be good to post something to 
the meetup group as well as here, Slack, etc.

If you or anyone else on the list feels like taking charge of this I'm happy to 
defer - otherwise I may try to organize something in the next month or so as I 
have time and energy.

Thanks,

Nate Wessel, PhD
Planner, Cartographer, Transport Nerd
NateWessel.com
On 2019-09-28 6:37 p.m., Steve Singer wrote:
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019, Nate Wessel wrote:



I for one would be happy to support a local effort to import high quality 
buildings in Toronto and/or the GTA. I
think if we can actually meet up face to face our discussions may remain a bit 
more civil and productive. Hopefully
consensus will be a bit easier to achieve with smaller groups too!

I see that the OSM Toronto meetup doesn't have any upcoming events... Would 
others in the GTA be interested in
planning a meet up to talk about a local import plan? Is anyone on the list in 
charge of organizing these?

I am one of the organizers of the OSM Toronto meetup.

I've now posted the regular monthly mappy hour meetup for the Toronto OSM 
group. I had been meaning to do this anyway.

I'm also happy to post a special event dedicated to discussing an import in the 
GTA if people are interested.






Best,

Nate Wessel, PhD
Planner, Cartographer, Transport Nerd
NateWessel.com

On 2019-09-28 1:03 p.m., Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

Hi all,

To be a bit more positive:

If we want to get buildings on the map, but we can't get Canada-wide
data improved by Statcan to a standard acceptable to all mappers in
Canada, IMO the best bet will be to split this into much smaller
batches and support local mappers who would be interested in getting
the data in.

In my browsing of neis-one.org statistics for Canadian mappers and the
Notes active in Canada, I've seen active mappers and small communities
in at least Halifax, Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, and Victoria
metros, and I might have missed some more. Many of them I have never
seen on the mailing list (which is a whole another issue), but
contacting them directly (via osm.org messages?), asking if they are
aware of other local mappers, if they would be interested in having
building data, if it is of acceptable standard to them, and if they
would be willing to help validate-and-upload the data (with help of
the central tooling) might get some success.

I hope that will go better than the previous attempt which could be
read - uncharitably - as a bunch of mailing list insiders throwing
federal data over the fence with little consultation.

It'll be a lot of work communicating and organizing. But getting
buildings is a lot of work, and if data producers can't do better,
whoever wants the buildings will have to do the work. Maybe with more
local support even the imports list will be more bearable.

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

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

Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada

[Eric Geiler]

Team Canada, (unsure who this should be address to)

We are a local/regional courier and trucking company in southern Ontario with a 
decent sized fleet.  We are using Mapbox for our mapping / nav engine, 
therefore subject to using OSM data.  We have noticed a number of “issues/lack 
of data” for southern Ontario.  This ranges from lack of lane info, to lack of 
buildings, missing streets, missing exit/on-ramps to for Hwy 400 (which we 
added, and had Mapbox expedite the changesets) as it affected navigation for 
our drivers.

We are currently using a few devices to provide street level imagery via 
Mapillary, with a push coming shortly to map 1000km per day of street imagery.  
We are currently mapping about 250km per day in York Region.  Our internal goal 
is to provide /gathered street level imagery for 75% York Region by end of 
January 2020.

We are not in a position to provide map edits etc, as due to staff resources 
and lack of experience, our staff are not suited to become ‘map editors’ as our 
core business is transportation.  We are just trying to assist the editors with 
accurate ground level info.

I would be interested in further understanding how we can become involved on a 
regional level to improve OSM in southern Ontario.


[EricGeiler-1]

From: Nate Wessel 
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 12:03 PM
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Importing buildings in Canada


John,
You are once again purposely mischaracterizing my position on this and I do not 
appreciate it one bit. Your import did not follow the import guidelines and was 
not approved by the broader community. It was not sent out to the mailing list, 
it was barely documented, it was not posted on the import page on the wiki... I 
could go on. I was not the only person who had a problem with it - I was just 
the first to say something. The buildings imported in Toronto were very low 
quality IMO and the changes were happening very, very quickly and without 
notice.

But we do not need to rehash old fights.

I would like to see buildings (re)imported in Toronto (the rest of Canada is 
not really my business), but I would like to see it done right. I can elaborate 
what I mean by that, but so can the archives of this mailing list. If people 
are interested in engaging in a serious discussion about moving forward with a 
building import for Toronto, I am happy to engage constructively with that.

Respectfully,

Nate Wessel, PhD
Planner, Cartographer, Transport Nerd
NateWessel.com
On 2019-09-27 11:44 a.m., john whelan wrote:
From memory we have imported Ottawa's buildings under the correct license (Stat 
Can so the federal government's open data license) and the quality was deemed 
acceptable by the local mappers.

Then we opened up a second import plan to import buildings and a fair number 
were imported.  This included an task manager set up with tiles to assist the 
mapping.

The data sources were different as each municipality created their own source.

My understanding is some mappers thought the data should be preprocessed and 
two or three were going to come up with a plan to preprocess the data.

About that time an American mapper, Nate, who was living in Toronto took 
exception to 1,000,000 buildings being imported in Western Canada and requested 
the DWG to remove them without waiting for discussion on talk-ca to address his 
concerns.

We do have three sources of correctly licensed data, the Stat Can data sets, 
the Microsoft data sets, and the NR Canada LiDAR data.

I do know that a number of departments and agencies would like to use buildings 
and although they can use the open data sources using OSM would be more 
convenient.

I'm not sure what if anything is happening at the moment.

Are we expecting local groups to draw up their own import plan as Ottawa did 
since we seem to be unable to get a consensus across Canada?

My gut feeling is with three sources of data we'll see new mappers importing in 
buildings without going through an import process.  Are we content to let that 
happen?

Have whoever it was who was going to come up with a preprocessing plan done so? 
 Has it been accepted by the rest of us?

I note that Pierre has noted there is now a validation process in JOSM for 
correcting buildings that are not quite 90 degrees on the corners.  Would an 
acceptable approach be to import then return to check the angles on the corners 
and correct them?

Does Nate still have unaddressed concerns about buildings being imported in 
Western Canada?

Can we get a consensus about what to do next?

Thanks John





___

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] hebdoOSM Nº 479 2019-09-17-2019-09-23

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 479 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/12408/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

hebdoOSM ? 
Qui : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où : 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Carte velo CyclOSM et Référence Route Verte

[Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca]

Personnellement je laisserait le TCT tel-quel pour que ce soit cohérent sur 
tout le pays. On est pas a un acronyme anglais près. Mais pour la route verte 
l’idée me semble bonne de changer le référence de 1 à RV1, ce serait pas mal 
plus parlant et lisible. Personnellement je laisserait tomber le -, c’est 
jamais très lisible et ça ajoute rien (on écrit en général  l’autoroute A15, 
pas A-15).

En ce qui concerne la réseau métropolitain et son seul trajet, le 20 de Oka à 
St-Hilaire, il me semble que la relation avait été crée au niveau local car la 
convention prise au Canada est que National c’est pour le pays, Régional pour 
les privinces et il reste Local pour le reste. Là je vois qu’il est maintenant 
Regional. Le principe de base est que les réseaux régionaux je se chevauchent 
pas, comme pour les routes - chaque territoire a sa nomenclature. Ici on dit 
que plusieurs réseaux régionaux vont se chevaucher, nommément RV (provincial) 
et RCM (la CMM). Changer sa référence de 20 à RM20 serait cohérent avec la 
suggestion précédente pour la RV. La plupart des rendus ne montrent pas la 
référence pour les routes de niveau local. Le mettre Regional me semble pas un 
gros péché et ça le fera mieux ressortir. Mais il faut se poser la question à 
savoir quelle est la règle. Si un tas de routes plutôt locales (veloute 
Bellechase, Cheminot à Quebec, Estriade, Montégériage, etc) passent toutes au 
status Regional la RV ressortira de moins en moins du lot. Les conséquences? je 
suis pas certain.

Pour ce qui est des routes dites Local, il me semble qu’il y a un peu d’abus 
dans OSM. Des gens crée de telles routes pour des pistes qui sont 
essentiellement locales a un quartier ou une petite région. L’i’dee d’une route 
demeure de marquer une voie qui permet de voyager sur une bonne distance, pas 
juste aller à l’école du quartier. Les termes local et route sont un peu 
antagonistes. Si la moindre petite piste cyclable devient une route la map 
cyclable deviendra rapidement illisibles et confuse. La voie peut avoir les 
tags cycleway sans qu’une route soit ajoutée.

Cheers.

> On Sep 30, 2019, at 13:00, Alouette955  wrote:
> 
> Je n’étais pas encore contributeur lorsque la RV a été initialement 
> cartographiée dans OSM. J’ai alors pris pour acquis que les discussions 
> avaient eu lieu et j’ai continué dans le même sens. Comme nouveau 
> contributeur on me (nous) disait de ne pas cartographier pour le rendu alors 
> j’étais très prudent 
>  
> Depuis il y a eu le premier segment du Réseau Vélo Métropolitain dont le 
> numéro est 20 et qu’on ne peut discriminer de la RV.
>  
> Je suis maintenant un peu plus aguerri et plutôt d’accord avec ta proposition 
> mais aimerais laisser pour quelques jours la chance aux initiateurs de se 
> prononcer.
>  
> Si pas de réponses je corrigerai d’ici peu pour la RV.
>  
> Pour la route TCT, elle court sur l’ensemble du Canada et elle est définie 
> dans des relations cyclables englobantes.
>  
> De plus si j’ai bien compris la TCT n’est que partiellement cyclable, il y 
> aurait des sections TCT randonnées. Ont-elles été cartographiées dans des 
> relations?
>  
>   ref: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada#Trans_Canada_Trail <>
>  
> Serait-il acceptable de ne renommer que les segments du Québec TC? J’aimerais 
> l’avis des initiateurs ...
>  
> Salutations,
>  
> Claude
>  
> From: Pierre Béland via Talk-ca <>
> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2019 2:27 PM
> To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <>
> Subject: [Talk-ca] Carte velo CyclOSM et Référence Route Verte
>  
> CyclOSM, une nouvelle carte vélo est disponible
> https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=14/45.5167/-73.5464/cyclosm 
> 
>  
> Et voici quelques commentaires pour les collègues du Québec, dont Claude, qui 
> font un suivi des réseaux de velo.
>  
> Sur les cartes de Velo, quoique la Route verte est bien tracée, il n'est pas 
> possible de l'identifier à partir de la référence puisque le no. est indiqué.
> Cela ne permet pas de clairement identifier ce réseau de vélo qui traverse 
> tout le Québec.  
>  
> Pour la clé-osm reference, je suggère donc d'ajouter le préfixe RV-
> Nous aurions donc
> ref=RV-1
>  RV-2 ...
>  
> Le sentier Trans-Canadien est lui identifié avec la référence TCT. Dans ce 
> cas, on pourrait indiquer ref=TC ce qui éviterait d'utiliser l'abbréviation  
> anglaise ou française (ie. STC, TCT).
> 
>  
> Pierre 
> 
>  
> 
>  Virus-free. www.avg.com 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> 

Re: [Talk-ca] Carte velo CyclOSM et Référence Route Verte

[Pierre Béland via Talk-ca]

Merci Claude,
En ce qui a trait au Sentier Trans-Canada, j'ai repéré les relations suivantes :

Relation : Trans Canada Trail (Montreal to Gatineau) (2890229) 
Relation: Trans Canada Trail (Montreal to Sherbrooke) (7633543)
Relation: Trans Canada Trail (Sherbrooke to Quebec City) (7373910)Relation: 
Trans Canada Trail (Quebec City to Beaupré) (7377607)Relation: Trans Canada 
Trail (Beaupré to New Brunswick) (7639926) 
Cette relation est incomplète, il manque la portion Beaupré à Saint-Siméon
 
Pierre 
 

Le lundi 30 septembre 2019 13 h 00 min 42 s UTC−4, Alouette955 
 a écrit :  
 
 Je n’étais pas encore contributeur lorsque la RV a été initialement 
cartographiée dans OSM. J’ai alors pris pour acquis que les discussions avaient 
eu lieu et j’ai continué dans le même sens. Comme nouveau contributeur on me 
(nous) disait de ne pas cartographier pour le rendu alors j’étais très prudent  
Depuis il y a eu le premier segment du Réseau Vélo Métropolitain dont le numéro 
est 20 et qu’on ne peut discriminer de la RV.  Je suis maintenant un peu plus 
aguerri et plutôt d’accord avec ta proposition mais aimerais laisser pour 
quelques jours la chance aux initiateurs de se prononcer. Si pas de réponses je 
corrigerai d’ici peu pour la RV. Pour la route TCT, elle court sur l’ensemble 
du Canada et elle est définie dans des relations cyclables englobantes.  De 
plus si j’ai bien compris la TCT n’est que partiellement cyclable, il y aurait 
des sections TCT randonnées. Ont-elles été cartographiées dans des relations?   
ref: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada#Trans_Canada_Trail Serait-il 
acceptable de ne renommer que les segments du Québec TC? J’aimerais l’avis des 
initiateurs ... Salutations, Claude From: Pierre Béland via Talk-ca Sent: 
Sunday, September 29, 2019 2:27 PMTo: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap Subject: [Talk-ca] 
Carte velo CyclOSM et Référence Route Verte CyclOSM, une nouvelle carte vélo 
est disponible
https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=14/45.5167/-73.5464/cyclosm Et voici quelques 
commentaires pour les collègues du Québec, dont Claude, qui font un suivi des 
réseaux de velo. Sur les cartes de Velo, quoique la Route verte est bien 
tracée, il n'est pas possible de l'identifier à partir de la référence puisque 
le no. est indiqué.
Cela ne permet pas de clairement identifier ce réseau de vélo qui traverse tout 
le Québec.  
 Pour la clé-osm reference, je suggère donc d'ajouter le préfixe RV-
Nous aurions doncref=RV-1 RV-2 ... Le sentier Trans-Canadien est lui 
identifié avec la référence TCT. Dans ce cas, on pourrait indiquer ref=TC ce 
qui éviterait d'utiliser l'abbréviation  anglaise ou française (ie. STC, TCT).
 Pierre 


|  | Virus-free. www.avg.com  |



___
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] Carte velo CyclOSM et Référence Route Verte

[Alouette955]

Je n’étais pas encore contributeur lorsque la RV a été initialement 
cartographiée dans OSM. J’ai alors pris pour acquis que les discussions avaient 
eu lieu et j’ai continué dans le même sens. Comme nouveau contributeur on me 
(nous) disait de ne pas cartographier pour le rendu alors j’étais très prudent 

Depuis il y a eu le premier segment du Réseau Vélo Métropolitain dont le numéro 
est 20 et qu’on ne peut discriminer de la RV. 

Je suis maintenant un peu plus aguerri et plutôt d’accord avec ta proposition 
mais aimerais laisser pour quelques jours la chance aux initiateurs de se 
prononcer.

Si pas de réponses je corrigerai d’ici peu pour la RV.

Pour la route TCT, elle court sur l’ensemble du Canada et elle est définie dans 
des relations cyclables englobantes. 

De plus si j’ai bien compris la TCT n’est que partiellement cyclable, il y 
aurait des sections TCT randonnées. Ont-elles été cartographiées dans des 
relations?

  ref: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada#Trans_Canada_Trail

Serait-il acceptable de ne renommer que les segments du Québec TC? J’aimerais 
l’avis des initiateurs ...

Salutations,

Claude

From: Pierre Béland via Talk-ca 
Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2019 2:27 PM
To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap 
Subject: [Talk-ca] Carte velo CyclOSM et Référence Route Verte

CyclOSM, une nouvelle carte vélo est disponible

https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=14/45.5167/-73.5464/cyclosm

Et voici quelques commentaires pour les collègues du Québec, dont Claude, qui 
font un suivi des réseaux de velo.

Sur les cartes de Velo, quoique la Route verte est bien tracée, il n'est pas 
possible de l'identifier à partir de la référence puisque le no. est indiqué.

Cela ne permet pas de clairement identifier ce réseau de vélo qui traverse tout 
le Québec.  


Pour la clé-osm reference, je suggère donc d'ajouter le préfixe RV-

Nous aurions donc
ref=RV-1
 RV-2 ...

Le sentier Trans-Canadien est lui identifié avec la référence TCT. Dans ce cas, 
on pourrait indiquer ref=TC ce qui éviterait d'utiliser l'abbréviation  
anglaise ou française (ie. STC, TCT).



Pierre 


 Virus-free. www.avg.com  




___
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] Importing buildings in Canada

[John Whelan]

I'm glad to see Toronto getting involved once more.

The original idea for using Open Data to import buildings followed on 
from a group of Toronto mappers who imported address information for a 
new sub division that was not available in CANVEC from Stats Canada 
after very carefully checking that the licenses etc aligned.


There was discussion in Talk-ca at the time before the import was done.

Cheerio John

Nate Wessel wrote on 2019-09-30 12:14 AM:


Hi Steve,

Thanks for posting the event! I just RSVPed.

I think a separate import event would probably be helpful - somewhere 
with wifi and outlets for laptops, probably not a bar. Perhaps we can 
book a meeting room at a public library or something?


I can poll some of the more active local editors to find a time that 
works well for people. Once we have a time and place it would be good 
to post something to the meetup group as well as here, Slack, etc.


If you or anyone else on the list feels like taking charge of this I'm 
happy to defer - otherwise I may try to organize something in the next 
month or so as I have time and energy.


Thanks,

Nate Wessel, PhD
Planner, Cartographer, Transport Nerd
NateWessel.com 

On 2019-09-28 6:37 p.m., Steve Singer wrote:

On Sat, 28 Sep 2019, Nate Wessel wrote:



I for one would be happy to support a local effort to import high 
quality buildings in Toronto and/or the GTA. I
think if we can actually meet up face to face our discussions may 
remain a bit more civil and productive. Hopefully

consensus will be a bit easier to achieve with smaller groups too!

I see that the OSM Toronto meetup doesn't have any upcoming 
events... Would others in the GTA be interested in
planning a meet up to talk about a local import plan? Is anyone on 
the list in charge of organizing these?


I am one of the organizers of the OSM Toronto meetup.

I've now posted the regular monthly mappy hour meetup for the Toronto 
OSM group. I had been meaning to do this anyway.


I'm also happy to post a special event dedicated to discussing an 
import in the GTA if people are interested.







Best,

Nate Wessel, PhD
Planner, Cartographer, Transport Nerd
NateWessel.com

On 2019-09-28 1:03 p.m., Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

Hi all,

To be a bit more positive:

If we want to get buildings on the map, but we can't get Canada-wide
data improved by Statcan to a standard acceptable to all mappers in
Canada, IMO the best bet will be to split this into much smaller
batches and support local mappers who would be interested in getting
the data in.

In my browsing of neis-one.org statistics for Canadian mappers and the
Notes active in Canada, I've seen active mappers and small communities
in at least Halifax, Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, and Victoria
metros, and I might have missed some more. Many of them I have never
seen on the mailing list (which is a whole another issue), but
contacting them directly (via osm.org messages?), asking if they are
aware of other local mappers, if they would be interested in having
building data, if it is of acceptable standard to them, and if they
would be willing to help validate-and-upload the data (with help of
the central tooling) might get some success.

I hope that will go better than the previous attempt which could be
read - uncharitably - as a bunch of mailing list insiders throwing
federal data over the fence with little consultation.

It'll be a lot of work communicating and organizing. But getting
buildings is a lot of work, and if data producers can't do better,
whoever wants the buildings will have to do the work. Maybe with more
local support even the imports list will be more bearable.

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


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