At least it is an indication of interest.

Thanks John

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019, 4:57 PM Darren Wiebe, <dar...@aleph-com.net> wrote:

> I'm from rural Alberta close to Lloydminster.  The building import is
> something that interests me and would be useful in my area but I haven't
> been very actively mapping over the last year or two.  Hopefully there are
> Alberta mappers on here who are much more active than I have been.
>
> Darren Wiebe
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 2:04 PM John Whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think my concerns are to do with the "black box" approach.  Knowing
>> your background I trust your work but others might not.
>>
>> On a technical side I get the impression that cites with buildings that
>> are close to each other are problematical.  I assume that small locations
>> with a population of say under 125,000 this is an insignificant problem?
>>
>> The other issue is I'd like to either see buy in from Nate or at least
>> some Toronto mappers to get an indication that something will happen at the
>> end of the day as it is a fair chunk of Daniel's time to work out how do
>> the preprocessing.
>>
>> I think some BC mappers expressed some doubts as well so perhaps they
>> would like to think about if they are happy or would prefer BC to be
>> outside of the import project and express their views.
>>
>> Out of interest if it does move ahead are we including the Microsoft data
>> for areas where we do not have data from Stats Canada?  If so we will need
>> to amend the project plan.
>>
>> My personal view is realistically I think having building information
>> even if its a meter or two out is better than not having the building
>> outlines.
>>
>> What would be nice is if we could have some indication from places such
>> as Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec excluding Montreal, Ontario
>> excluding Toronto and the other provinces and territories whether they are
>> happy with importing the buildings either from Stats or Microsoft.
>>
>> I seem to recall Keith is in Manitoba, so any views other than it wasn't
>> present in the first release from Stats?
>>
>> Note to Alessandro this is just background stuff.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> Begin Daniel wrote on 2019-03-26 3:29 PM:
>>
>> 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 <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 <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> 
>> <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 
>> listTalk-ca@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-ca mailing 
>> listTalk-ca@openstreetmap.orghttps://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
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Reply via email to