Hi Steve,
As for Montreal: We will create an import plan on the wiki as soon as we
have expanded the discussion about the Montreal import from our local
face-to-face group to the Montreal OSM list and agreed on importing.
Before we do this, we wanted to test the feasibility of the
pre-processing first, as it involves quite some postgis coding to break
up the building blocks into single buildings. Only thereafter, we will
suggest an import (or not), depending on the feasibility of extracting
single buildings. Otherwise we will follow the hand-drawn approach as
usual (and as it is done on a daily basis at the moment by a couple of
OSMappers).
The Microsoft data set might still be useful for remote areas. Let's
explore this altogether.
Cheers,
Tim
On 2019-03-02 19:17, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
On Mar 2, 2019, at 3:47 PM, John Whelan<jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:
Two years ago a group of Toronto mappers submitted the City of Toronto Open
Data license to the LWG to see if it was acceptable. I assume they meant to
import things such as building outlines. I also assumed as I think others did
that this meant Toronto mappers were happy to import the City of Toronto's data
especially as it was discussed on talk-ca first.
Historical info is appreciated for context, however, the LWG found Canada-wide
city-by-city submissions for ODbL-compliance burdensome, given LWG's limited
bandwidth. Assuming about events in the past is unhelpful, first because it is
assuming (seldom helpful) and second, these events are in the past. How
Toronto imported (building) data can't really help us first understand and
second improve from what we learn until we know what we learned. That isn't
presented here, but it could be.
More recently Nate who currently lives in Toronto feels that this should be
discussed once more in Toronto to work out what is desired etc.
I agree with Nate. Perhaps first in Toronto, perhaps wider in talk-ca. "Once
more" seems limiting, though it's possible it could suffice.
Tim I think is organising Montreal open data import.
Please consider adding this (and links to user: wiki or Talk pages) to the
active Import wiki. Generate communication using our media!
I note that Nate and Tim have different ideas about what should be imported.
One is happy with bay windows and I think the other feels they should be
removed.
More discussion often yields consensus, especially as it "goes wide" (or as
wide as is practical).
We also have Pierre who is unhappy because the imported building outlines
available have too many corners that are not right angles.
More discussion often yields consensus.
The local Ottawa mappers are content with their Open Data import and find the
data quality acceptable even though Pierre has expressed reservations about it.
More discussion often yields consensus. Wide area (large cities,
province-wide, nationwide) imports are not easy to achieve consensus but can
often reach something approaching one as data are entered, not liked, improved,
liked better, et cetera. These are often an interactive, iterative process.
Someone in Manitoba? mentioned there were no building outlines released for
Manitoba? I apologise if I have the province name wrong.
It is spelled correctly. I am not Canadian and I know that; it isn't hard to
spell-check Manitoba.
So we have a mixture of expectations which is only to be expected in a large
group.
More discussion often yields consensus. It might be part "mixture of expectations" but I'm sure
that everyone will agree that "high quality data entering OSM" is expected. What can be difficult
is "what do we mean by high quality?" (in addition to establishing and communicating clear goals
for the importation of the data).
Microsoft's Open Data provides another source of Open Data which might meet
Pierre's data quality expectations. They may meet Nate's. All provinces and
Territories now have Open Data building outlines available.
OK, thanks for the clarification that a "union" of these datasets (Stats Canada-produced building
data + Microsoft-produced building data) provide an "all provinces and Territories dataset." That
truly is helpful as it makes it clear that "if Set A doesn't have your province's or Territory's
building data, Set B will."
Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and Yukon have populations of around 35,000
people. Realistically I don't think they have a group of local OSM mappers.
Please don't "write them off" so easily. Not only does it seem "not nice," it may not be true. A
better approach may be to actively develop community there, difficult as that might seem. I believe there is usually
Internet available there in the villages (sometimes via clever and state-of-the-art methodologies) and it may be as
simple as "shaking the trees" of the right people, then "they'll take it from there."
Essentially the problem now we no longer have a Canada wide consensus on what
is acceptable
More discussion often yields consensus.
...appears to be how do you identify local mappers across Canada and how far away can a
"local" mapper be to be considered local since it is the local mappers who make
the decision about what is acceptable and I think it is they who have to drive the import
process.
There are no such "hard and fast" rules as this. I think you're on the right track that "hinterland" (I do not mean
that disparagingly, rather more like "far away from others") OSM volunteers "drive the import process," so I again
encourage you and others to "better develop" this community and let them, teach them, encourage them to "do what they
will."
I'm sure if a local group would like to contact me we can find resources to
assist them if required.
Excellent that you volunteer to be a "point person." While it's important that people "step
up" like that, wider, open communication (here in talk-ca, the wiki page, the wiki's Discussion tab /
talk page...) is also to be encouraged. In short, you can't cast the net too wide, so be broad in the reach
to do so. De-centralize while developing both breadth and width (the whole country, at province-wide and
city/vllage-wide levels) as well as "experts/consultants who are available" to answer questions and
provide directional guidance and technical assistance. Good luck!
SteveA
California
_______________________________________________
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
