Along the lines of what Jarek said, sometimes silence just means tacit acceptance, or that it's not that controversial. There's quite a bit of government data here that is supposedly "open" but unavailable for OSM, so I'm very glad Stats Can was able to find a way to collect municipal data and publish it under one national license. I was surprised myself it hadn't got more attention, but I'm firmly onboard with more imports if done with care. Manually adding buildings - especially residential neighborhoods, is about the most boring task I can think of, yet it does add a lot to the map.
I'll admit I hadn't looked at the data quality myself, but I just did review several task squares around BC and they look pretty good. Houses were all in the right place, accurate, and generally as much or even more detailed than I typically see. Issues seemed to be mostly the larger commercial buildings being overly large or missing detail, but in general these are the buildings most likely to be already mapped. To a large degree, it's up the individual importer to do some quality control, review against existing object, satellite, etc. If we have specific issues we can and should address them, but if the data is largely good then I see no need to abort or revert. alarobric On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 7:41 PM Jarek Piórkowski <ja...@piorkowski.ca> wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 21:46, OSM Volunteer stevea > <stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote: > > Thanks, Jarek. Considering I am a proponent of "perfection must not be > the enemy of good" (regarding OSM data entry), I think data which are "darn > good, though not perfect" DO deserve to enter into OSM. Sometimes "darn > good" might be 85%, 95% "good," as then we'll get it to 99% and then 100% > over time. But if the focus on "how" isn't sharp enough to get it to 85% > (or so) during initial entry, go back and start over to get that number > up. 85% sounds arbitrary, I know, but think of it as "a solid B" which > might be "passes the class for now" without failing. And it's good we > develop a "meanwhile strategy" to take it to 99% and then 100% in the > (near- or at most mid-term) future. This isn't outrageously difficult, > though it does take patience and coordination. Open communication is a > prerequisite. > > Thank you for this commitment. I wish others shared it. Unfortunately > the reality I've been seeing in OSM is that edits which are 90+% good > (like this import) are challenged, while edits which are 50+% bad > (maps.me submissions, wheelmap/rosemary v0.4.4 going to completely > wrong locations for _years_) go unchallenged or are laboriously > manually fixed afterward. > > --Jarek > > _______________________________________________ > 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
