<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>I tend to agree with Frederik on this. <br>
</p>
<p>I'm not quite sure why there's a feeling that all places need to
be mapped at some minimum level of detail. Just because one area
has e.g. landuses that doesn't mean all the countryside needs them
too for consistency. I see this inconsistency of
detail/completeness as one of the strengths of OSM actually.
Places that are missing data now would presumably have less
accurate data if there were an import that didn't involve
extensive engagement from local mappers. When the data is not
there at least you can see what's missing and replace it in your
personal projects with data from other sources.<br>
</p>
<p>Importing huge amounts of data just produces stale data if we do
little in the meantime to cultivate engaged mappers. And in that
regard, I think we lead by example to a large degree. If we show
new members of this OSM community that big things get done through
(sometimes contentious) imports, then that is how new contributors
are likely to engage with the project. If we instead demonstrate
that a lot can be accomplished by individuals mapping the areas
they know personally, then perhaps that is the outcome we will see
more of. <br>
</p>
<p>Cheers,<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-signature">Nate Wessel<br>
<span style="font-size:10px;color:#777">Jack of all trades, Master
of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning<br>
<a href="http://natewessel.com">NateWessel.com</a></span>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/30/19 3:28 AM, Frederik Ramm
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1bb1f905-42f4-dd62-5512-19bb7fa99c32@remote.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hi,
On 30.04.19 02:02, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Are we to conclude that
since a part has been mapped, all parts would have been eventually
mapped?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
All places of interest to enough people would eventually be mapped.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I'll give an example: Toronto, a metro region of about 5 million
people, did not have the vast majority of its buildings mapped until
an import started in late 2018.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I think buildings are overrated. If the local mappers prefer to
concentrate on other things, that's not a problem.
And yes, not all areas on the planet currently have enough mappers to
map the place well. But we're not a business project where we need to
deliver results by Q3 or else our shareholders will complain. We can
give the community time to grow, and decide what they want to do with
their time, and how important it is to them to have a map, and what they
want to have on the map.
And yes, there might be regions that will never have a good OSM map
because the locals don't care or can't afford the time to make it. Does
that mean someone else should step in and do it for them? I think not.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">every hour sketching buildings
from imagery where they could be imported is an hour editors aren't
out in the real world surveying or recruiting new mappers.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
For me, sketching buildings doesn't usually collide with surveying
because I do the former when it's dark outside ;)
If you say there are local mappers in a place and they are willing to
take ownership of an imported building data set, removing buildings that
get torn down and adding buildings that get built, and so on, then I'm
much more inclined to welcome a building import than if someone says
"there's nobody mapping this here anyway so might as well import".
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">But okay, so we just don't map every single-family building in OSM.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
This is not a decision that needs to be the same across OSM. In some
cities mappers might run out of stuff to map and start to map lamp posts
and trees because they're done with buildings; in others, they might not
even start the buildings.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Then another example: I have just now sketched in the first forest
polygons in a part of a UNESCO World Biosphere Reserve. Somehow no
craft mapper had done it yet, but maybe they would have in another
decade?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Sure, it takes time to do it well, and if it's not in OSM then you can
mix in a shape file from the UNESCO or whatnot if you need it on your map.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">For that matter, there are parts of London Zone 2 which are missing
shops and multi-unit buildings.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Maybe none of the locals was interested enough to add them. We shouldn't
judge them on that.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">But I suppose we have a process to
cooperatively assemble local knowledge of human mappers that will
allow them to be mapped, someday, maybe.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Exactly. And if it takes another decade for the local community to take
ownership and do it, then that's what it takes. Sure I could fly there
and add all the shops quickly, but what then, am I going to fly there
every month from now on to update?
Bye
Frederik
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>