Kate, What was the source for the building footprint import ?
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Kate Chapman <k...@maploser.com> wrote: > We did an imperfect import of building footprints in Washington D.C. a > while ago. I personally find it makes the map far more usable for > adding other information. With the buildings in I am able to add > stores and other details easily without using a GPS, simply by > printing Walking Papers. > > Personally for me I enjoy outlining buildings, but there are plenty of > other places without footprints where I could do that if I had the > urge. > > -Kate > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:46 AM, William Morris > > <wboyk...@geosprocket.com> wrote: > >> So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license > upgrade: > >> > >> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/umd_subset.osm > >> > >> That's an extract of the UVM-SAL building footprints I'd like to > >> import for swathes of MD and PA. My workflow for killing existing > >> feature conflicts actually went best without involving ESRI at all: > >> > >> 1.) In QGIS, Set up 0.2-degree import grid over new building coverage > areas > >> 2.) Pull down one grid cell worth of OSM data using the QGIS OSM plugin > >> 3.) Add building footprint .shp, select all footprints that intersect > >> OSM lines or polygons > >> 4.) Switch selection, save as new .shp > >> 5.) Run ogr2osm.py on new .shp (Special thanks to Andrew Guertin for > >> running me through that process) > >> 6.) Open new .osm file in JOSM, add building tags, upload. > >> 7.) Repeat for next import grid cell > >> > >> Tedious, but it'll get the job done. And a reminder: I do not intend > >> to add any building footprint that conflicts with an existing feature, > >> adhering to the OSM preference for user-added features over imports. > >> Now soliciting thoughts, roadblocks, expressions of ennui, etc. > >> Thanks! > >> > >> -Bill Morris > > > > My objection is a generic one and one that has been heard before on > > this channel. To be clear, I do not wish to criticise Bill; he > > appears to be following the bulk edit guidelines and he is engaging in > > the discussions here. That's fantastic. Bill, welcome to the > > community. > > > > I think imports (taking a large number of objects from an external > > source and placing them in OSM all at once) is bad for the community. > > Most of you have heard me say this before. I still have no hard > > evidence to prove it. There is also no hard counter-evidence. At > > best, imported data will be unmaintained. I glibly offer most TIGER > > ways as evidence. > > > > I ask you to suspend disbelief for a moment, and presume that imports > > are generally bad, and presume that adding new mappers is generally > > good. > > > > Can we try something new? Can we use this building data as motivation > > to get new mappers in those areas so that specific mappers will have a > > stronger connection to the data in specific areas? > > > > Something like this: > > - Let's set a smaller grid. Something like a large suburban arterial > > block, say 1.5km / 1 mi square. > > - If you want to import the buildings in one grid square, you have to > > find a new mapper in that area, and they have to do an on the ground > > survey of some part of that area. > > - You can only do so in areas that are no more than four grid squares > > from your home location (or work location). > > > > This is a cross between "adding game-features to OSM", "banning > > imports" and "having users adopt part of the map". :-) > > > > This could be really beneficial to a new mapper. They could survey > > the local fire station, police station, hospital and schools, and > > perhaps the businesses on the main street, and a few local shopping > > malls. They get all of those business names, and they'll be > > completely up to date. They'll add them to the map, and they don't > > have to trace as many building outlines, because they have the > > external source available. > > > > What I hope this will encourage is: > > - new mappers in those areas > > - who will do new foot surveys of interesting things > > - and will feel attached to the data > > - and keep it up to date over time. > > > > And, if the new mapper understands that the building data for their > > area is a "reward", they are unlikely to be frustrated or discouraged > > by it if some buildings end up in the wrong place. the new mapper > > will just fix them. And carry on mapping. > > > > I know that what I suggest is much harder than simply importing the > > data from one or two accounts. I suggest that the benefit of finding > > and encouraging new mappers in your area is much greater than just > > having new building outlines in your area. > > > > Now the Negative Army will jump in and say, "That's too hard.", "That > > will never work.", "I want buildings now." > > > > You can take leadership on this. Are you the only active mapper in > > your city or region, or one of only a few? Do this. Be a leader. > > Grow the community and then you won't be able to keep up with the > > growth of the map. Build new contributors. (And host local OSM > > groups.) > > > > Thanks for letting me hijack your thread, Bill. :-) > > > > Best regards, > > Richard. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Imports mailing list > > impo...@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > -- John Novak Novacell Technologies and the Old Topo Depot http://www.novacell.com 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676)
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us