Looking at all of north of Canada, I see that most
of it has been first mapped using Lakewalker Plugin and Landsat imagery.
I see tags created_by=Dshpak_landsat_lakes or source=Landsat.
Those of you that have imported Canvec data in such regions are surely familiar
with that problem could confirm and help document Canvec Import Guidelines to
facilitate imports by newcomers.
What procedure do you recommend? Do you agree that we should recommend to erase
Landsat imagery before importing Canvec data?
This can be done easily in JOSM. We just have to use the find filter
created_by=shpak_landsat_lakes and erase the selected objects.
Too risky?
Pierre
>________________________________
> De : Pierre Béland <infosbelas-...@yahoo.fr>
>À : "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
>Envoyé le : Jeudi 15 novembre 2012 12h48
>Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts
>
>
>North of Québec province, and probably elsewhere in Canada, I see a lot of
>objects identified with created
by=Dshpak_landsat_lakes. These are apparently traced by the Lakewalker JOSM
Plugin that vectorize landsat imagery. See
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Lakewalker
>
>There were also PGS imports for coastline that are of poor quality. I think it
>is agreed that we should delete PGS before importing Canvec.
>
>I dont see documentation or discussions on how to treat Dshpak objects when
>importing Canvec data.
>
>Canvec seems of better quality then these landsat derived objects. Is this
>true?
>
>If so, do people agree that we should give instruction to erase all these
>objects before importing Canvec data?
>
>What other objects should be erased systematically?
>
>
>
>Pierre
>
>
>
>>________________________________
>> De : James Ewen <ve6...@gmail.com>
>>À : "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
>>Envoyé le : Jeudi 15 novembre 2012 11h06
>>Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts
>>
>>A really simple answer that gets lost is this:
>>
>>Did you make the edits to the best of your ability,
and your edits add value to the OSM project?
>>
>>If so, then it was the right thing to do.
>>
>>We all bring different levels of ability, and may not do things perfectly
>>according to the "experts", but if we do the best we can, and are helping to
>>make the map better, that's the goal.
>>
>>Someone may come along and make the data you edited even better, but your
>>efforts are always appreciated.
>>
>>OSM is community project, and the whole community is welcome to help to the
>>extent that their skill set allows. You are also welcome to increase your
>>skill set through learning by reading and asking questions.
>>
>>Welcome to OSM and have fun!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 2012-11-15, at 7:11 AM, Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've just performed my first edits, in our neighbourhood. One thing I
>>> noticed was that some of the
buildings are duplicates. I assume this is part of what you are talking about
when you mention internal CanVec conflicts. In the case of a local public
school, I deleted one of the copies and dragged the other to match the Bing
image. Was that the right thing to do?
>>>
>>> Tom Taylor
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-ca mailing list
>>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Talk-ca mailing list
>>Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-ca mailing list
>Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
