On 2016-08-25 10:13:25, Gordon Dewis wrote: > Alan is right. I've brought in a few tiles worth of forests from Canvec in > the area you're talking about, but they were non-trivial to deal with > compared to most other features. I kept running into limits in the tools I > was using at the time and I haven't returned to them since.
Yeah, that's what I figured.... I hope my comment didn't come across as criticizing the work that was done importing that data into OSM - I know how challenging and frustrating that work can be. But I must admit it seems a little rough to have those patches up there. I don't mind the "seams" between the CANVEC imported blocks, which don't seem to show up on the main map anymore anyways. But the *missing* blocks are really problematic and confusing. And they show up not only all the way up north and in weird places, but in critical areas. for example, here's a blank spot right north of Canada's capital: http://osm.org/go/cIhYCSU-?m= It seems a whole area was just not imported up there... oops! This shows up here and there in seemingly random places. I wonder if it wouldn't be better to remove parts of the CANVEC import until we can figure out how to better import them in the future, if, of course, we have a documented way of restoring the state of affairs we have now... As was mentionned elsewhere, it seems to me that the data that is there now somewhat makes it more difficult to go forward and hides more important data (like park boundaries). I believe it would be more important to map out park boundaries than actual forest limits which, quite unfortunately, change in pretty dramatic ways in Québec, due to massive logging that has been happening for decades. As for "landuse" conflicts between forests and lakes: I have just spent a few days up north in an isolated region, and I can tell you our mental boundaries of what is a "lake" and what is "forest" get a whole new meaning when you portage through a mud path. :p Heck, beavers are always hard at work messing up any work we do up there. Same for humans that blow up their dams. Those human/animal wars can turn a river into a lake in a season and vice-versa. It's a mess out there, but we could stick with the basics and have general, well defined boundaries in place... I understand that people focus on the city, but it would be great to have a more appealing global map as well, and it seems to me just dropping the forests at this point would be a bold move, but it would bring a much better consistency and look to the map. I have to say the work that has happened over the years on OSM is just mind-boggling. I remember doing mapping work almost a decade ago and OSM just looked like a geeky project without much future, since *everything* had to be done from scratch. Heck, I was mapping major highways in my city back then[1], thinking that this would never take off the ground. Next thing I knew, some random stranger on the internet drew *everything else* in the neighborhood and the city started taking shape before my eyes. [1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/428304 How far away we have come so that I can complain about ugly squares up north and be taken seriously: thanks everyone for contributing. :) And thanks for the feedback! A. -- Uncompromising war resistance and refusal to do military service under any circumstances. - Albert Einstein _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca