I totally agree with you on that. I'm one of Glenn's beta testers and I have noticed that depending on the town, the data given by GRB/Crab can be good or very bad/outdated. Also the data is rather limited in the types of buildings that it recognizes, which is a problem for me. Feel free to take a look at [1] to see stuff that is obviously wrong in GRB, even from aerial imagery. I gave up on adding more screenshots recently, but it should give you an idea of the data quality you can expect :-)
m. [1] https://xian.smugmug.com/OSM/Screenshots/AGIV-Problems/ On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Gerard Vanderveken <g...@ghia.eu> wrote: > Congrats!!! > ( I didn't connect the OSM username with you.) > > To me, as there are not much real unmapped places in Belgium, you should > always start from the map and during survey check what is missing and > otherwise, if what is present on the map is actually still present and > correct. > Else you could take a lot of pictures and notes of things already done. > Seems a waste of time and effort to me. > > As said below, for me the current mapping of sidewalks is fine! > > For the buildings and house numbering, I see a lot of the same problems with > these automatic imports as in regard with the 'import' of satelite photo's. > Every day, buildings, new streets, ... get constructed or demolished. > Satelite photo's and databases are frequently not on par with the real > situation. > eg. In Huldenberg you have Zagerijstraat, Priesterberg, 20 houses down at > the St-Jansbergstwg, etc. > IMO, every import at the desk, should be followed or preceeded by a survey > at place, to verify current status. > I consider these tools more as a drawing aid and see the real force of the > open street map in its continual survey by the many and as such following > much closer the reality, then the other tools. > > Regards, > Gerard > > > Marc Gemis wrote: > > I know I mapped the place in detail, but I hoped people would mention > what they would map without looking at the map :-) > > I stopped mapping house numbers ( I have collected more than 20.000 by > hand according to Pascal Neis :-) ), as they are imported via CRAB at > the moment and maybe later this year via a GRB import (with the > buildings). > That's why I turned to other stuff. > > I've heard pro's and con's for separate sidewalks & cycleways. I don't > separate them as long as there is no physical barrier (hedge, guard > rail, ditch,...) > I'll try to map sidewalk=... or cycleway=... on the road though. > > I'll have a closer look at the TIA sign > > m. > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Gerard Vanderveken <g...@ghia.eu> wrote: > > > Hi, > > Checking on the map, learns me that most items are already thoroughly mapped > (street cabinets, bins, advertising, lanes, crossings,...) > Things lacking, but not derivable from the photo are the division of > buildings and the corresponding addresses of the buildings. > IMO addresses are of more importance then the little street furniture and > should get more priority in mapping. > Not meaning, that I don't appreciate these mappings, every added object > counts! > > When you have lot of time, you could also map the separated footwalk and > bicycle paths, but this is advanced stuff, and I don't recommend it, as it > is not so easy to make a correct separation and have all options for > connections and resulting in no foot etc on the main highway itself, so that > routing programs for bike and foot will always select the correct paths. If > not done well, it makes more clutter then making things real or clear. > It seems these paths are already good and sufficient tagged in the map. > > So, in short, at first sight, not much extra to map from the photo. > (I assume the sign to TIA is simply a direction and not part of a (tourist) > route, which would imply a missing relation for some bicycle route/network) > > Regards, > Gerard. > > Marc Gemis wrote: > > > > I wonder whether we could learn to see/map more by looking at each > other's survey pictures. Would it allow novices to "see more" ? Let's > try out > I know the mailing list does not allow to include pictures, so you > have to do it with a link > > What could/would you map when you look at [1] ? What would you > investigate further ? > > Feel free to answer in French/German/English or Dutch > > p.s. Feel free to look at the other pictures at the site [2] and map > anything you want :-) Under the picture you'll find a (i) which shows > a map when you click it > > > ---- Nederlands ---- > > Ik vraag me af of we van elkaar kunnen leren als we kijken naar de > foto's die we maken tijdens een survey ? Zou het helpen om > (beginnende) mappers meer te leren zien ? Laat ons het eens > uitproberen. Jammer genoeg laat de mailing list niet toe om foto's toe > te voegen, dus moet je het met een link stellen > > Wat zou je kunnen mappen, of wat map je gewoonlijk als je [1] bekijkt > ? Wat zou je van nader bij gaan bekijken ? > > > p.s. Het staat je vrij om naar de andere foto's op de site [2] te > kijken en om het even wat te mappen dat je erop ziet :-) Onder de foto > staat een (i), als je daarop klikt, zie je een kaartje. > > > > > [1] > https://photos.smugmug.com/OSM/OSM-2016/2016-06-09-Wilrijk/i-b8Xdd5g/0/O/DSC_3228.jpg > [2] gallery: > https://xian.smugmug.com/OSM/OSM-2016/2016-06-09-Wilrijk/i-b8Xdd5g > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
