[Talk-ca] Canvec/Geobase point feature - Render
richard at weait.com
Tue Mar 24 00:37:34 GMT 2009
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 20:05 -0400, Michel Gilbert wrote:
> 2009/3/23 Sam Vekemans <acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com>
> I have not yet received the answer from NRCan about if the
> location of the node is EXACTLY where the building actually
> is, or is it just shown in the general area. If it is the
> former, then this information can be taken into account.
Sam, why should the building point location be EXACT? We know that all
data, regardless of source, will have a degree of precision depending on
many things. Buildings are worth having, in my opinion, even if only as
> The position of buildings may be "exact" if the acquisition methods
> was from stereo-digitization. If it came from map scanning they may
> have been displaced for map representation purposes. My guess is 80%
> of the buildings in CanVec come from map scanning.
> What i can do, and i presume that you all would agree, is to
> add this feature to the "not4osm" folder so then it could be
> used as an assistant for the person who is actually uploading
> the information.
I disagree. Worth including in my opinion. Default renders may chose
to render them or not. Some future render may do "cool things" based on
the number of buildings / area. Who can predict future creativity? The
buildings exist, or existed at the time of survey. Worth knowing.
> Following the new information I received from
> tilesathome at openstreetmap.org (i have just forwarded the email to
> talk-ca) we may still want them for mapping purposes.
> We can list them, then check with the tilesathome at openstreetmap.org
> talk if they are part of the render feature.
And even if the default renderers don't want point buildings, perhaps
the renderer at openstreetmap.ca will. Or YourCompany.com might make a
fortune offering point-building renderers.
> For example, when the feature lists 9 or so different feature
> types, the general practice for both GeoBase & CanVec is to
> state "-1" unknown and "0" none ... i would suggest that
> these features be omitted from the import also.
> Any thoughts on that?
Sam, I'm sure I don't know to what you refer here. Could you clarify
> Again it depends if the tilesathome at openstreetmap.org talk confirm
> that no render is possible. If we really want them display we can ask
> them ?
Even if the default mapnik, T at H and others don't render point-buildings
we can adjust them for our own purposes. (We can also ask the
maintainers to add support for point buildings.)
More information about the Talk-ca