<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Jul 22, 2022, 11:53 by cascafico@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div>Il giorno ven 22 lug 2022 alle ore 10:39 Mateusz Konieczny via Imports <<a href="mailto:imports@openstreetmap.org" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">imports@openstreetmap.org</a>> ha scritto:<br></div><div>><br></div><div>> Have you contacted all local communities affected?<br></div><div>No. Considering small extensions and personal work, test areas are very close to manual tracing. The only changeset involving a large and problematic area has been submitted to Greece mailing list before uploading.<br></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Then I think you definitely need to consult local communities in case of making edits<br></div><div dir="auto">without verification on recent imagery.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">They may be fine with it and approve such import - but not all of them.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div>> How imported data will be verified?<br></div><div>Sorry, I cannot find verification references in import guidelines. Anyway I just split a specific paragraph [1] to underline uploaded changesets.<br></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">If you import dataset from 2014 then in my opinion you need to verify<br></div><div dir="auto">data before upload<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you import machine generated dataset then in my opinion you need to verify<br></div><div dir="auto">data before upload<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This is a consensus of mappers in Poland and imports were reverted due to violating<br></div><div dir="auto">this.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div>> Which imageries will be used to verify imported buildings?<br></div><div>MS declares Bing, Maxar, Airbus imagery. No data on which and where provider objects are AI-traced.<br></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">I am NOT asking how it was generated. I am asking you to confirm that you verify<br></div><div dir="auto">data (depending on local community - fully or doing some spot checks)<br></div><div dir="auto">using reliable and recent imagery, before uploads.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div><div>> How you will avoid importing buildings demolished in 2014 and deleted since?<br></div><div>No chances to know that. In filtering criteria I can just add demolished:building that shall exclude touching candidates.. Anyway, any mapper can retrace deleted buildings, since 2014 imagery (and older) are still around.<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Many areas have more recent imagery.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Absolutely do not edit in Poland with such procedure, mapping there based on 2014<br></div><div dir="auto">Bing imagery will not end well.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">You also should consult with local communities before making such edits, as in other<br></div><div dir="auto">regions mappers may have a similar opinion.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I strongly oppose blanket-approving such global edit.<br></div> </body>
</html>