<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head><body style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12pt;"
bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div style="font-size:
12pt;font-family: Verdana;">My personal view is if we have a process
that follows the rules available then at least there is more chance they
will be followed and edits will not be reversed.<br><br>I might note
the buildings in Regina have amazing similar outlines to the ones made
available via the Stats Canada file but I really wouldn't like to say
they had definitely been imported improperly.<br><br>One of the problems
with the source=tag is it does get deleted from time to time. Locally
we have a mapper who if he adds any sort of detail to a highway that has
source=CANVEC on it removes the source tag on the grounds that not all
the information has come from CANVEC. It does make auditing the map
more difficult.<br><br>In Europe there is considerably more resistance
to imports than in Canada but strangely enough there is a proposal going
through the import mailing list currently for importing building
outlines from government sources in <span style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34);
font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight:
400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent:
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing:
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255); text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;
display: inline !important; float: none;">Belgium at the moment so
hopefully our proposal will meet less resistance than some others.<br><br>Cheerio
John<br></span><br><span>OSM Volunteer stevea wrote on 2018-11-05 2:10
PM:</span><br><blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7CC3910F-F067-4127-A44D-8A1E05036A9B@softworkers.com"><pre wrap="">On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:29 AM, keith hartley <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:keith.a.hartley@gmail.com"><keith.a.hartley@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">I saw it was a great job. But you're correct, I have no documentation on how they did it. Licence process, wiki ( I feel Steve already yelling at his computer)
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">If you mean me, I'm saddened to hear that others think I "yell." Rather, my motivation is to see that:
1) High quality (or VERY high quality) data are what get uploaded to OSM,
2) License terms are compatible with ODbL (I respect how difficult this can be, especially with the limited bandwidth of OSM's LWG and the wide variety of activities taking place in a very widely geographically dispersed country like Canada) and
3) Communication about these efforts stay within a public realm (or "more public," as in "open source based protocols" rather than "secret sauce walkie talkies" hobbled by license agreements, like Facebook/Twitter/Instagram and Slack). Yes, primary among these are talk-ca and imports mailing lists, OSM's wiki pages, especially explicit Import Plans and Tasking Manager for projects "approved" by the wider community and actually underway.
Right now, with John Whelan's (and others') recent newer thrusts to provide momentum to buildings getting entered (and/or improved) on Canada, I'm doing my best to "largely watch" (from the sidelines) what is happening right now. I see no reason to "burn bridges" when I don't mean to or need to do that.
And yes, I do know that "you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar." (No, that isn't a slight at calling anybody "flies," rather a saying that means "positive encouragement works much better than throwing rocks").
SteveA
California
</pre></blockquote><br><div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<div>Sent from <a
href="https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach"><span
style="color: rgb(0, 157, 247);">Postbox</span></a></div></div></div></body></html>