What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight up
import of the original building geometries would probably be (i) less
contentious (since a building is a building is a building), and (ii)
more accurate for calculating population figures (a use for building
data for humanitarian purposes) and (iii) better for OSM since lots of
buildings is better than landuse=residential polygons.
Sometimes people can try to be *too* clever. 🙂
On 16/08/18 13:16, Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:
Satellite imagery is available for the world..
But how much do you know of Africa?
[...]
You maybe don't realize that but the kind of data garbage i pointed to
is the direct result of projecting ideas and experiences of settlement
structures of some part of the world onto a different one. We are
mostly talking about scattered dwellings of what are probably mostly
subsistence farmers here. The pointless polygon geometry drawing is
the failed attempt to regard those as a typical European/North American
residential area.
If this is due to a lack of knowledge about the actual geography or
because of a misguided belief that making it crudely look a bit like an
European/North American residential area is kind of beneficial for the
people there i don't know.
Anyway we are drifting off-topic here and this does not really help the
original question from John. My answer to that would be: Yes,
automated methods can help to find unmapped settlements in OSM - less
though in actually mapping them.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
