Hi Jonathan, I work with a GIS users group in Manitoba (MGUG.ca) and we were talking about how to use OSM as a learning tool for high school students as well. >From our education sub-committee we discussed that building footprints or adding roads doesn't add to what the provincial high school geo subject curriculum needs. One suggestion was rather then adding new data and supervising edits, we can augment the map to be more detailed. (better trails, active transport, or building accessibility for disabled people)
One example would be addressing mobility and accessibility around the school. If we could get a few high schools within an area to participate, we could could add buildings that are accessible via ramps ect, or maybe signaled crosswalks. That information could show the students issues that vision impaired, or mobility restricted people face, while at the same time improving the map. (similar to wheel map https://wheelmap.org) We're still at the discussion stage, but just a thought! Thanks, Keith On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:20 PM, <talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to > talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: A message aimed more at Ottawa (john whelan) > 2. Re: A message aimed more at Ottawa (OSM Volunteer stevea) > 3. Re: BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools (Jonathan Brown) > 4. Re: BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools (john whelan) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 18:56:51 -0500 > From: john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> > To: James <james2...@gmail.com> > Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa > Message-ID: > <CAJ-Ex1HHxbMFRtCGtjep22fg3sKy=5PBWMz0A+XZ5QJsRe6hMw@mail.gmail. > com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > But it doesn't address traffic volumes or speed limits. Should we tag > speed limits? > > Cheerio John > > On 23 January 2018 at 18:38, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > All that documentation was produced by Cycle Ottawa data devision. So by > > cyclists for cyclists > > > > On Jan 23, 2018 6:30 PM, "john whelan" <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> The SOTM presentation was interesting. Especially the bit about the 5% > >> who would cycle anyway and these are often the people who are asked > about > >> what should be done to improve things for cyclists. Are we asking the > >> wrong people? > >> > >> I think we need to identify what tags would be useful for routing > >> purposes and to identify which standard tags we can use. > >> > >> For example a nearby road has a cycle lane sort of depending how you > >> define it. It does appear on the city's cycling maps but isn't > snowplowed > >> in winter and is not formally signed to provincial standards. It's > Merkley > >> Drive K4A 1M7 if you want to look at it. It used to be in Cumberland > but > >> got amalgamated into the City of Ottawa. There are other cycle lanes in > >> the City of Ottawa that do not meet provincial standards. > >> > >> Traffic volumes would be nice but how do you estimate them or obtain > them > >> via Open Data perhaps? The City of Ottawa probably has the data and we > are > >> cleared to incorporate it into OSM. > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> > >> Cheerio John > >> > >> On 23 January 2018 at 17:15, Harald Kliems <kli...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 3:56 PM john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Perhaps what we need is a way to tag cycle friendly streets. > Typically > >>>> I'll use a mixture of minor side streets and paths when using the > trike. > >>>> > >>>> So I'd prefer a routing that used these as much as possible rather > than > >>>> more major collector roads and you can't always determine from the > speed > >>>> limit if it's a cycle friendly road or not although I too avoid > highways > >>>> with a speed limit above 40 km/h. > >>>> > >>> There are efforts to identify bike-friendly streets based on OSM > >>> attributes (and possibly additional data such as traffic counts). > People > >>> for Bikes, a large industry-sponsored advocacy org in the US has put > money > >>> forward to take the concept of "Traffic level of stress" and then use > >>> OSM-data to calculate whether a specific street and intersection is > >>> low-stress or high-stress. You can find a SOTM-US talk about the > "Bicycle > >>> Network Analaysis" project here: https://2017.stateofthemap.us/ > >>> program/bicycle-network-analysis.html > >>> > >>> https://bna.peopleforbikes.org/#/ > >>> > >>> The bike advocacy group I'm involved with here in Madison (WI) has been > >>> using the map/data generated through the Bicycle Network Analysis > process, > >>> and we're working on a validation process to a) figure out where our > local > >>> knowledge disagrees with the calculated stress value and then b) > figure out > >>> whether that's an issue of the underlying OSM data (spoiler alert: in > many > >>> cases it is) or a different issue. Happy to answer any questions about > this. > >>> > >>> Harald (formerly Montreal, and therefore still subscribed to talk-ca) > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Talk-ca mailing list > >> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > >> > >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/ > attachments/20180123/922f7184/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:07:27 -0800 > From: OSM Volunteer stevea <stevea...@softworkers.com> > To: john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com>, talk-ca > <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa > Message-ID: <cf13e638-452d-431f-9157-e2ded222a...@softworkers.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > John Whelan says: > > Thoughts? > > There are obviously "deep thoughts" going on regarding how OSM can > document and provide better geo data, routing and maps for Canadian > cyclists: my hat is off to the serious "front-loading" going on here and I > wish to encourage it so that it may flourish. > > Simultaneously, much can be said about getting (and having) a "basic > workable framework" which provides useful information of the above sorts, > right now. As I look at Ottawa area bicycle tagging (both infrastructure > and routes, as they are two different kinds of OSM data entry; the former > as good tags in infrastructure elements the latter as good tags on route > relations) I find this framework satisfactory (though I am not local). > > To take a "first best practice" approach, I might suggest that a milestone > be defined for a "1.0" version of what is attempting to be achieved. This > might be what I find as I do this sort of OSM work (and consulting about > it) in the USA: getting to a reasonable harmony between what local > jurisdictions define and document as both bicycle infrastructure and > bicycle routes, and whether those data are well-represented in OSM. Ottawa > might be there, it might not, but if you don't know that, it becomes > difficult to measure progress and better plan for the ambitious future you > have. > > Weather-related local conventions are a new twist I am not familiar with > (being from California), and I wish you luck in having those emerge to be > useful to your local (and eventually, regional and national) cyclists. > Other (similar) concerns like "level of stress" (which seems to be > deeply-ingrained as part of the "bicycle parlance" in local government) and > "bikability," level of riding comfort, appropriateness for younger or > less-experienced riders, etc. are topics which have been well-explored. As > I mention, sometimes these turn into either new tags, new tagging schemas > (some more successful, some less) and new renderers (e.g. the Mapzen bike > routing links I offered earlier quickly evolved from a v1 to a v2, with > substantial feedback-generated improvements). Those are real-life stories > which show that there is a somewhat-long path: > > Existing bicycle infrastructure -> maps (hard- and soft-copy) published by > local jurisdictions -> routes of this infrastructure (ditto, though > sometimes these are "more independently developed") -> data of these sorts > (plural!) getting into OSM -> renderers which use these data (OpenCycleMap, > waymarkedtrails.org, mapzen...) -> routers which use these data (e.g. > cycle.travel...). > > That path/workflow bubbles up from the roots of streets and routes folks > bike on and the feedback loop of local jurisdictions to > make/develop/improve/document these, all the way to a savvy biker running > an iPhone app that produces the "perfect route, today, because it is > snowing lightly, and my daughter is accompanying me to the park we are > biking to" with the swipe of a finger. Obviously, there is a LOT "in the > middle" there, and that "big middle" will be both the same (structurally, > within OSM and its conventions of tagging and building renderers and > routers) and different (in the case of "we have speed limit data and > traffic volume and snow-day data here"). > > Seek out the existing "wheels already invented" (some within OSM, some > not). Learn from those what didn't work and what might be repurposed to > work and work well. Use the good tenets of OSM (consensus, plastic tagging > which can well-accommodate new strategies like "how do I bike on a snow > day?" and the "soft" aspect of software to build renderers and routers > (should you eventually get there, and I believe you will). The future of > bicycling in Ottawa (and Canada) looks like it is going to LOVE OSM and all > it has to offer these efforts! > > Get to a consensus of "local (government's view of bicycling) 1.0 is now > OSM 1.0" and then put the pieces together of what will be (I can feel it in > my bones!) a terrific 2.0. And 3.0 and beyond. However, nothing ever > happens without a good plan, and good planning and good project management > is what will get you there. The solid backbone and structure of OSM is the > vessel, and Ottawa and Canada are very well on your way to fantastic > bicycle geo data and tools. The rest of the pieces come from dialog, > consensus, good community building, good planing and good implementation. > Go! > > SteveA > California > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 19:45:03 -0500 > From: Jonathan Brown <jonab...@gmail.com> > To: "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools > Message-ID: <5a67d713.4aa0240a.e9853.0...@mx.google.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Looking for anyone who has done a BC2020i mapathon event with high school > students. We are hoping to run one in Niagara, Durham and Northumberland > regions this winter/spring. > > Jonathan > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/ > attachments/20180123/446b78fc/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 20:19:52 -0500 > From: john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> > To: Jonathan Brown <jonab...@gmail.com> > Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools > Message-ID: > <CAJ-Ex1G3Zve=ontxsHictiEaUesXUvKyONLBAj-1_4EJ8caaKQ@mail. > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Buildings Canada? > > I was involved with something in Ottawa. I deliberately used JOSM and the > building tool plugin. It went very smoothly and a fair number of buildings > were accurately mapped. The mappers were requested to come with JAVA > preinstalled. I had two laptops set up that new mappers could start off > with and we had sufficient resources that we could take them fairly quickly > through the steps and get them mapping. The number of buildings mapped per > new mapper was in the order of 60 per minute. > > Make sure you have spare mice with you. > > There were a number of other mapathons as part of geoweek that used iD. > Unfortunately the quality of mapping was not that high leading to > compliants about the data quality. > > Building numbers from mapathons from new mappers anything from four to > twenty buildings each. This is from cleaning up in currently Malawi where > a fair number of iD mappers are still not managing to tag a building with > building=yes. > > If you are running just one session then validate by looking over their > shoulder. If more than one line up some resources to quickly validate and > use JOSM for this. The faster the feedback the better the response. > > If you are thinking of grading the work watch out for someone coming along > and either correcting the work as in validation or simply deleting it from > a quality point of view. Remember that some GIS people like to do > population estimates based on the square meters of the buildings so > accurate mapping helps. Buildings that are mapped at twice the proper size > screw up the population estimates. > > Have fun. > > Cheerio John > > > > On 23 Jan 2018 7:46 pm, "Jonathan Brown" <jonab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Looking for anyone who has done a BC2020i mapathon event with high school > > students. We are hoping to run one in Niagara, Durham and Northumberland > > regions this winter/spring. > > > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/ > attachments/20180123/b948e5e5/attachment.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 7 > *************************************** >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
