Both of your instincts on the matter are correct - these polygons are the result of CANVEC data imports and has to do with how that data is packaged for distribution by Natural Resources. If you go to the CANVEC site, click on the map, and zoom to an address, you eventually get to the level where the data is divided into discreet blocks. This is partially to manage the size of the shape files that make up this data (they can be quite large).
This isn't an issue for items like roads or features that fit within one of these areas. But if a feature crosses a boundary, then it is split by the shape files. These forest polygons are divided exactly along these shape dividers. These polygons do not have a high level of percision, but I don't believe they were ever really meant to. There is only so much detail that the CANVEC files can have. These shape are also, in some cases, quite old. Some surveys by Natural Resources are more that thirty years old with no need to really update them. As to why they haven't been fixed? It's not that we've ignored these blocks or their accuracy. Rather, it's more a matter of priority. Most mappers are busy with major settlements and other human inhabited areas. Most of these blocks are in areas with little human activity. As making efforts progress, these blocks will probably get addressed, but as you can imagine, it's a big task. The polygons will need to be either merged or redrawn to conform with the underlying land use. Adam On Aug 25, 2016 2:50 AM, "Alan Richards" <alarob...@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe these are the result of importing Canvec landuse data for some > areas and not for others. Because the data is in square chunks, you end up > with these unnatural looking squares on the map. Really it's just a case of > the other areas don't have detail yet. > > Across the border it looks like the US just has parks and national > forests, etc. mapped, and not the general natural=forest that you see > across Canada. > > Alan (alarobric) > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Antoine Beaupré <anar...@orangeseeds.org> > wrote: > >> hi everyone (allo tout le monde!!) >> >> one of the most frustrating experiences I have with Openstreetmap in >> Canada is this ugly forest display: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/45.227/-73.916 >> >> Just compare how the forests and parks are mapped between the US and >> Canada. On our side of the border, you got huge chunks of square forests >> that definitely do not reflect the current reality, whereas down south >> you clearly see national parks, forests and no weird square things. >> >> I don't really understand how this happened, but it's been there a long >> time. I feel it's some Canvec import that went wrong, but it's been >> there for so long that it seems people just forgot about it or moved on. >> >> I looked around in the .qc and .ca wiki pages and couldn't find anything >> about it, so I figured I would bring that up here (again?). >> >> Are there any plans to fix this? How would one go around fixing this >> anyways? >> >> In particular, I'm curious to hear if people would know how to import >> *all* the park limits in Québec. It seems those are better mapped in >> Ontario, and I can't imagine those wore drawn by hand.. >> >> Thanks for any feedback (and please CC me, I'm not on the list). >> >> A. >> >> -- >> We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more >> humane and fair than the world your governments have made before. >> - John Perry Barlow, 1996 >> A Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
