<html><body><div style="color:; background-color:; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div><span>Few observations relating to Montreal </span><span> </span><span>031H05.0.2.osm. This is similar to what Adam observed.<br></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Croissant Louise is an example were geometry was imported in OSM from Canvec but indicated as commited.<br>
</div>
<div>Canvec <span>031H05.0.2.osm </span>ways=-135070,-134550,-135430<span></span> [fixme=commited] [highway=unclassified] corresponds to OSM ways 128837201,128837203,128837202 [highway=unclassified].<br>
</div>
<div>
<span></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
Canvec way=-135310 [fixme=commited] [highway=unclassified] corresponds to OSM way 13858176 [highway=service].<br>
These ways have different geometries.<br>
<br>Canvec way=-135338 in Fixme_Canvec_O31H05 is not present in O31H05.0.2.osm but exist (in Canvec v11?).<div><br>I also saw roundabout indicated has commited that are treated differently in the two systems : a way making a circle in Canvec, and a simple end node with attribute highway=roundabout in OSM.<br><br> </div><div><span style="font-style:italic;color:rgb(0, 0, 191);font-weight:bold;">Pierre <br></span></div><div> <br><br> <div>----- Mail original -----<br> > De : Adam Dunn <dunnadam@gmail.com><br> > À : "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org><br> > Cc : <br> > Envoyé le : Samedi 28 juillet 2012 17h26<br> > Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Fixme Files<br> > <br>>( Relating to 092G02.1.1.2)<br>> I've done some manual comparisons between Canvec 10 and OSM in New<br>> Westminster (Vancouver) area, and for the most part, the fixme seems<br>> pretty accurate (ignoring highways
marked due to being unclassified).<br>> Omissions and commisions seem to be correct, and I was easily able to<br>> spot a little road (the east tail end of Glover Avenue) that is<br>> missing in OSM (but present in Canvec and Bing aerial). However, take<br>> a look at these residential areas off Mulberry Place<br>> [http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.238584&lon=-122.910982&zoom=18&layers=M].<br>> There are several roads present in OSM where there are blank spots in<br>> Canvec, and yet the Fixme file did not mark them (it only marked some<br>> of them). This could be due to comparison to Canvec 11, which I don't<br>> have, or maybe the algorithm needs some more tuning.<br>> <br>> In looking at Fixme files for Vancouver, Calgary, Montreal and<br>> Moncton, I have not seen a single "Attributed" tag (and I'm using <br>> JOSM<br>> filters to try and find them). Has this been implemented yet? Have
any<br>> examples to show?<br>> <br>> Adam<br>> <br>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Adam Dunn <dunnadam@gmail.com> wrote:<br>>> Thanks for the mappaint style Pierre. That comes in very handy!<br>>> <br>>> (Following two paragraphs relate to 092G02.1.1.0, you will need to get<br>>> correct Canvec files from main ftp, as the included files are<br>>> incorrect, as pointed out by PNorman)<br>>> Looks like the comparison isn't picking up on <br>> "highway=unclassified"?<br>>> The notes tag doesn't specify unclassified as being covered, and this<br>>> seems to be the case from the files. Take a look at this shopping mall<br>>> area: <br>> [http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.192201&lon=-122.948192&zoom=18&layers=M].<br>>> Both Canvec and OSM have the service roads marked as <br>> "unclassified",<br>>> and are of equal geometry (in fact, it
is a GeoBase import that mbiker<br>>> did), and yet they are marked as "committed" (missing in OSM).<br>>> <br>>> Across the highway to the south<br>>> <br>> [http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.187566&lon=-122.945054&zoom=18&layers=M],<br>>> there are several roads that are tagged "unclassified" in Canvec <br>> 10,<br>>> but the tagging on OSM has been changed to "residential". The <br>> fixme<br>>> file does not contain them (no changes necessary). It would appear<br>>> that handling unclassified should be included or notification that<br>>> it's a tagging issue, rather than a commit.<br>>> <br>>> (This is from 021I02.0.2.3)<br>>> It also seems as though you are using newer Canvec data (11?) to<br>>> generate the fixme file? Looking at random new residential area in<br>>> Moncton <br>>
[http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.071156&lon=-64.756724&zoom=18&layers=M],<br>>> there are no roads in OSM or the included Canvec files, but the Fixme<br>>> file lists roads as being present. I guess this is a sneak preview of<br>>> what will be coming in Canvec 11? The roads are partially constructed<br>>> when looking at Bing imagery.<br>>> <br>>> So far this is some really really great information. Lets iron out the<br>>> bugs and we'll have an awesome system to work with.<br>>> <br>>> Adam<br>>> <br>>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Pierre Béland <br>> <infosbelas-gps@yahoo.fr> wrote:<br>>>> To facilitate the visualization of Canvec Fixme files and comparison <br>> with<br>>>> OSM data in JOSM, I made a Custom Mappaint stylesheet and added Imagery<br>>>> sources to the JOSM Imagery Sources.<br>>>>
<br>>>> The file canvec-fixme.mapcss, enclosed in this message, highlights <br>> objects<br>>>> with different colors based on the Fixme messages. This helps <br>> distinguish<br>>>> the various warning messages related to objects described in the Canvec<br>>>> Fixme file.<br>>>> <br>>>> To use this Stylesheet, save it on your local disk and install it in <br>> JOSM<br>>>> from the Mappaint Preferences menu. This will be added to the Map <br>> Styles<br>>>> List.<br>>>> <br>>>> The objects are colored based on the Fixme message as described below :<br>>>> <br>>>> COLOR<br>>>> <br>>>> RED Commited – Canvec feature does not match any Osm feature.<br>>>> Missing/Misclassified Osm feature?<br>>>> GREEN
Omited – Osm feature does not match any Canvec feature.<br>>>> Missing/Misclassified Canvec feature?<br>>>> BLUE Unmatched – OSM and Canvec geometries are significantly<br>>>> different.Geometries need to be fixed?<br>>>> YELLOW Attributed – Osm and Canvec geometries matched but some <br>> common<br>>>> attributes differ. Attributes need to be fixed?<br>>>> <br>>>> I also added Geobase / Canvec Imagery sources in the JOSM Wiki Map page<br>>>> (https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps). To select these Imagery <br>> sources<br>>>> in JOSM, select the WMS-TMS Preferences menu. Click on the Refresh <br>> button<br>>>> at the right of the smallmap. Then, in the CA section of the list of<br>>>> providers, you can activate Canvec, Geobase Hydro or Geobase roads<br>>>>
Imageries.<br>>>> <br>>>> I hope that both the stylesheet and the Imagery sources will simplify <br>> the<br>>>> comparison of the Canvec Fixme files with the OSM database.<br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> Pierre<br>>>> <br>>>> ________________________________<br>>>> De : "Bégin, Daniel" <Daniel.Begin@RNCan-NRCan.gc.ca><br>>>> À : "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <br>> <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org><br>>>> Envoyé le : Vendredi 27 juillet 2012 12h31<br>>>> Objet : [Talk-ca] Fixme Files<br>>>> <br>>>> Bonjour,<br>>>> <br>>>> Here are some Fixme file samples for Calgary, Moncton, Montreal, <br>> Ottawa,<br>>>> St-John's, Vancouver and Winnipeg<br>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec:_Fixme_files<br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> Please, have a look and
comment on format/content to make it <br>> appropriate for<br>>>> the community.<br>>>> Good weekend!<br>>>> <br>>>> Daniel<br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>> Talk-ca mailing list<br>>>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org<br>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca<br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> <br>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>> Talk-ca mailing list<br>>>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org<br>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca<br>>>> <br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Talk-ca mailing list<br>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org<br>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca<br>> </div> </div> </div></body></html>