Jarek, The area you proposed in quite interesting and will force me to look further at buildings with sharing edges, a concern Pierre also had. I'll be back soon with your area processed. Daniel
-----Original Message----- From: Begin Daniel [mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 14:34 To: Jarek Piórkowski; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import Jarek, Since it is a one-time process, I expect to be able to process the files if the community feels comfortable with it. In the meantime, people are welcome to send me the bounding box of an area they would like to examine. Daniel -----Original Message----- From: Jarek Piórkowski [mailto:ja...@piorkowski.ca] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 13:46 To: Begin Daniel; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 13:10, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote: > There is actually no standard “code” available since I use FME > (www.safe.com). It is a proprietary ETL application and all operations are > done using “transformers” (https://www.safe.com/transformers/). I can provide > you with the workbench I developed (a bunch of linked transformers) but you > need a license to run it. This is why I tried to describe the operations I > run on the data in the wiki. > > As you did, people may send me coordinates (bounding box) of an area they > know well. I’ll process the area and send the results back in OSM format. > Please, be reasonable on the amount of data to process ;-) Thanks Daniel. Let me know how it looks then! Coming from an open-source background, the process is unusual to me, and I have questions about scalability - will you be able to process and provide updated data files for all of Canada then? - but if others are comfortable with it then I won't object. Some general thoughts regarding tooling as raised upthread: I was initially excited to see building footprints data as they help two quite distinct purposes: 1. they provide a mostly-automatic source of geometries for the millions of single-family houses that wouldn't be mapped in the next decade otherwise 2. they might provide a corrected and fairly accurate source of geometries in heavily-built-up areas, where GPS signal is not that reliable and it can be really difficult to get sufficiently accurate geometries from imagery, whether because it's not sufficiently high-resolution, two sets of imagery with conflicting offsets (Bing and Esri are the two best sets in Toronto, and they're off by about 1-2 m on north-south axis from each other - that's not something I can check with a consumer-grade GPS so I'm left guessing as to which is true), or non-vertical imagery (I can count the floors on supposedly top-down imagery in some cases). From what I saw, imports in the GTHA initially focused on the first case, and I think the Tasking Manager setup was mostly sufficient for those - where there is nothing currently on the map, or a few simple 2D geometries, a 4 sq km area can feasibly be done in under an hour. However, as raised by others, I would really want the working squares in Old Toronto for example to be no more than 500 m x 500 m, or no more than 1 km x 1 km in St. Catharines. I would _love_ to have the geometries to manually compare and adjust the 3D buildings already existing in the area, but it will be much slower. --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
