There is also a factual basis in the example Scruss provided: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:12.PNG
TD Place(Renovated/New buildings constructed in Summer 2014) is not mapped in the DWG(scruss said as far back as 2011) In the newer data it is: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:13.PNG I know this as I am a local mapper. On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:52 PM, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can guarantee that this data is roof level data. While I was examining > data there were cart returns mapped as outlines. This data was also traced > via orthophotos > > On Oct 24, 2016 6:45 PM, "Christoph Hormann" <chris_horm...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> On Monday 24 October 2016, Stewart C. Russell wrote: >> > >> > > Could you please clarify what the alleged source of the building >> > > data to be imported is? >> > >> > Yes, as far as I understand it, at least: these data to be imported >> > were given to a group of OSM contributors by the City of Ottawa. They >> > have explicit permission to include it in OSM from the City. The only >> > place you can inspect the data is on the contributors' own hosting >> > sites, as the city doesn't host it anywhere. Details of the licence >> > and permissions are on the Ottawa import information page. >> >> I would then suggest to contact the person who provided the files for >> metadata and specifications on those, in particular dates and methods >> of survey, processing applied, especially coordinate system conversions >> and specifications on what exactly is contained in it (i.e. what the >> definition of a building is here and if it's ground footprints or roof >> outlines). You also might want to specifically ask regarding the >> geometry issues i pointed out earlier. >> >> You can be pretty sure the original producer of this data set has this >> information and if there is interest in having this data in OSM they >> should also be willing to provide such information. >> >> In OpenStreetMap we put high importance on knowing and documenting how >> data is acquired since - as every experienced mapper knows - sources of >> information can be faulty and misleading. Just because someone says: I >> have this data here and you may use it and it mostly looks reasonable >> and plausible at the first glance does not mean we should throw all our >> sense for critical evaluation of sources out of the window, especially >> if you plan to add several hundred thousand new features. >> >> > The public 2011 data set is cut into 2×1 km tiles, slicing through >> > buildings on the border. There are no common attributes which would >> > allow repair, as the data is packaged in AutoCAD DWG files. >> >> This alone should not be a problem since you know the location of the >> cuts and therefore could dissolve them based on position. >> >> The real question is - is there a factual basis for the assumption that >> the data you intend to import is newer than the data in these files? >> Note a different level of detail is not necessarily an indication for >> age or accuracy of the data. >> >> >> -- >> Christoph Hormann >> http://www.imagico.de/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Imports mailing list >> impo...@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports >> > -- 外に遊びに行こう!
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca