Sounds good to me. At least we have raised the issue and discussed it.
Cheerio John
James wrote on 2018-11-05 3:17 PM:
As "Frederick Ramm" would say having external IDs is pointless when
you can do a spatial join to see what is there and what is not
On Nov. 5, 2018 3:05 p.m., "John Whelan" <jwhelan0...@gmail.com
<mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Something that has come up in the Netherlands is they did an
import then try to update the buildings once a month. By having
some sort of id tag on the building their feeling is it makes it
much easier to pick out new buildings.
On the technical side would we have such an id on the building
outline if we should wish to separate out new buildings and import
them later. Currently I don't think we do and someone maybe able
to work it out from the position but is it something we should
think about?
Cheerio John
John Marshall wrote on 2018-11-04 6:40 PM:
Great idea John
John
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018, 16:48 john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com
<mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:
I've started the process off by an introductory post to the
import mailing list and we are working on a wiki page which
will be based on the Stat Canada City of Ottawa import wiki page.
Cheerio John
On Fri, 2 Nov 2018, 7:34 pm James <james2...@gmail.com
<mailto:james2...@gmail.com> wrote:
if anyone needs a TM or micro data service, I'm available
for this
On Fri., Nov. 2, 2018, 7:32 p.m. John Whelan
<jwhelan0...@gmail.com <mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:
This approach seems very sensible however Pierre has
raised the issue of poorly mapped buildings and we
are aware that some were mapped in a mapathon
environment so whilst Ottawa used a"leave existing
buildings alone" approach is this an area where some
judgement should be used? and yes I am aware that
the official party line is to correct what is there
to retain the history which means taking the "Ottawa"
approach is less controversial but would probably
give us more inaccuracies on the map.
An alternative might be to import all the buildings
with a different tag than building=yes then leave it
to mappers to inspect each before turning the switch
or change the tags to building=yes. Those that
overlap poorly mapped buildings could be left to some
sort of clean up phase.
Thanks John
Matthew Darwin wrote on 2018-11-02 7:07 PM:
I think we should identify who would like to be
involved in import for each municipality. (on a
wiki page). On the page, identify roles, like:
* coordinator
* import data preparation
* QA
* import execution
* data enrichment (commercial, residential, etc...
tagging)
* etc..
Then we can see where we have gaps and how to fill
them. Perhaps some municipalities have local
mappers who will be happy to do the tagging of
building type (and can do some validation if the
buildings look right), but no technical capability
to execute the actual import. And maybe some folks
who did imports before will help areas where we have
no technical expertise.
On 2018-11-02 6:58 p.m., John Whelan wrote:
So to paraphrase your reply. A centralised import
plan in the wiki which says the data is approved
for import and should be tackled in chunks of some
sort of region since we are a decentralized
organization. Which I think is similar to the way
Task Manager works. The project is broken into
tiles and each tile is tackled completed
separately. The 'Tiles' would of course be somewhat
larger in area and there is a technical limitation
as to how big an area can be downloaded from the
OSM server.
The local mappers certainly have a role to play and
because the goal is not only to import the
buildings but to enrich the tags with commercial
etc so the tag enrichment would be a task that a
mapathon could tackle. I personally don't think a
new mapper using iD in a mapathon has a role to
play in importing the building outlines into OSM.
The plan should include the technical steps to
import the data.
Thanks
Cheerio John
Pierre Béland wrote on 2018-11-02 6:35 PM:
Pour le Québec, je retrouve les données de
plusieurs municipalités
Montréal, Longueuil, Repentigny, Shawinigan,
Québec et Rimouski.
Première observation rapide, aussi, elles sont de
bonne qualité et proviennent je suppose des
cadastres des municipalités. En milieu urbain,
cela facilite beaucoup l'identification des
immeubles juxtaposés.
Je vois ailleurs, aux États-Unis notamment avec
les données de Microsoft, que les projets sont par
région ou municipalité.
Je pense qu'il faut éviter un projet trop
centralisé tant pour assurer un meilleur contrôle
du déroulement dans chaque municipalité, région
que pour permettre aux communautés des provinces
et communautés locales de s'impliquer.
La rédaction d' une page wiki pour l'ensemble du
Canada peut répondre aux exigences du groupe
Import de OSM. Mais l'organisation doit être
décentralisée.
Le rôle de cette liste doit être un forum pour
supporter les communautés des provinces et
communautés locales. C'est une occasion de
dynamiser ces communautés avec un projet très
intéressant. De là, ils auront le goût de
compléter la carte pour y décrire les
infrastructures locales.
Si trop de tâches sont initiées en parallèle sur
un gestionnaire de tâches, il sera très difficile
de coordonner, assurer le suivi, une progression
coordonnée. Il faut éviter que des mapathons ou
organisations externes s'invitent pour collaborer
à de telles tâches avec les milliers et milliers
de personnes qui viennent jardiner quelques heures
sans organisation / formation réelle et laissent
ensuite le tout sans dessus, dessous.
--
Sent from Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
<mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
<mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
--
Sent from Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
<mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
--
Sent from Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
--
Sent from Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
