[Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread john whelan
Looking at my local map in Orleans Ontario noticed that Merkley Drive does not connect up to Charlemagne. Merkley Drive is tagged Geobase_import_2009 and all sorts of interesting things. Charlemagne is just tagged potlach and residential road. Is there an easy way to extend Merkley Drive so it

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread Sam Vekemans
Hi, just use potlatch connect the roads. No harm done :-) The OSM changeset history keeps track of attribution and such. If you want a copy of where the geobase version of that road is, i can provide that. The system that imported the roads didnt want to interfeer with what work previous

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread john whelan
Yes I'm new and my background is red tape. I understand there is a lot going on and I appreciate the work that has been done. My background is in databases etc. If you ask clients what they want they always rate reliability above anything else. To me the data from geobase is good high quality

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread Steve Singer
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009, john whelan wrote: What appears to have happened is where the data has been merged roads that are in the geobase database no longer connect to roads that have been put in via potlatch. I think the end point is dropped. The older potlatch roads do not have the same depth

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread James Ewen
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:43 AM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote: What appears to have happened is where the data has been merged roads that are in the geobase database no longer connect to roads that have been put in via potlatch.  I think the end point is dropped. There is a

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread John Whelan
OK accepting what you say is there a way to identify where an old OSM road was so that some one can go back and clean up the new geobase added data? Connect the roads and insert road sections that have been deleted? I think Toronto organised something that recognised the quality of the data by

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread James Ewen
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 1:39 PM, John Whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote: OK accepting what you say is there a way to identify where an old OSM road was so that some one can go back and clean up the new geobase added data? Actually it's more like the opposite. The old OSM road gets priority,

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread Adam Dunn
In JOSM, another way to quickly add on to a way like that is to use the select tool to select the way you will be adding on to, holding the shift (or control) key, selecting the last node in the way, then use the draw (add) tool to continue drawing the way. By default, in JOSM, if you have a node

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread John Whelan
I found both James's and Sam's comments very useful. It gives me a much clearer idea of what you are trying to do and the limitations involved. It would appear that we have the ability to identify roads omitted from the geobase import which means at some point in time given enough resources a

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread Frank Steggink
Hi John, I personally think it would be better to do the cleanup immediately after the import, or possible during the import. Of course it is very tedious to do so, and it will slow down the import, but the person who is doing the import, knows best which roads were omitted. The goal is not

Re: [Talk-ca] Correcting Geobase_import_2009

2009-10-25 Thread john whelan
The difficulty with this approach is people keep adding data. Which is fine if its high quality but where people are doing tracing on lower quality data you end up with a mess. I think you have to accept that with the OSM approach the data will be of variable quality. Even users with WAAS GPS