I agree and we are sensitive to Quebec's position.
I think the hope was we would make the data available and that local
mappers would be involved in the import over time as happens with
CANVEC. One comment I heard early on was this isn't so much an import
as a marathon.
What seems to have happened is a lot of buildings have been imported
very quickly. In rural areas or places where there are few buildings
this isn't so much of a problem. Certain locations have run in very
smoothly.
I think the data quality is considerably better than iD and Mapathons
with new mappers.
The original data files are available on an Open Data portal with a
license that is compatible with OSM and to be honest we have very little
control over who can download them or what they do with them.
What we do have is a process that was used in Ottawa and is fairly
robust. Data quality is very dependent on the individual mappers doing
the import though.
Looking at the stats I don't think much has been done in Quebec and I
feel James would be happy to restrict access Quebec in someway if that
would make you happier for the moment. It has been set up as a separate
set of tiles so can be isolated fairly easily.
Could you be nice and chat to the Quebec mappers and sound them out on
what they would like to do? The data for Quebec is from Quebec
municipalities by the way. Please bear in mind that Microsoft are
rumoured to be about to release building data for Canada in the same way
as they have for the US. This is scanned from images data and I suspect
the data quality will not be as high as the Municipal data. I
understand there are multiple imports going on with the US Microsoft
building outline data currently.
I seem to recall that Daniel Begin, who I believe is a Quebec mapper,
made comments on the project in talk-ca some time ago. I also seem to
recall it was his suggestion that we made it a single import plan.
Thoughts?
Thanks John
Pierre Béland wrote on 2019-01-18 6:54 PM:
John,
Il y a local et local. Compte-tenu des différences culturelles Québec
vs Canada en général et que les contributeurs du Québec ne fréquentent
pratiquement pas cette liste, vous ne devriez pas prendre pour acquis
que vous représentez cette communauté et pouvez démarrer des projets
en son nom.
Pierre
Le vendredi 18 janvier 2019 13 h 11 min 37 s HNE, john whelan
<jwhelan0...@gmail.com> a écrit :
I know of no other way to contact him but he made an interesting
comment that the project is on hold in the wiki pending review.
Would he care to comment on who is supposed to be reviewing the project?
My understanding is that the import was raised in talk-ca before it
commenced for comment and these were generally favourable. I took
that as the local mappers to Canada had been consulted and they are
the "local mappers" authority in this case.
I understand he has concerns about local mappers making decisions but
in Canada we have been importing similar data through CANVEC for some
time. CANVEC data comes from a number of sources including municipal
data.
Is he suggesting that each of the 3,700 municipalities in Canada
should form a group of local mappers who can make individual decisions
on whether their municipal data should be imported and we should end
up with 3,700 import plans?
Thanks John
_______________________________________________
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
