<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">We're over the 40 k limit again so I trimmed it.</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br><div dir="auto">I get the impression that just adding the building outline or even an approximation of a building outline adds value to the map.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">My own house has a cantilever on the back so the upper story extends beyond the basement outline. It also has a porch on the front which has a basement. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">My personal view is a rectangle that represents the basic shape is more than acceptable however I can appreciate that some might like to have a greater level of detail.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I personally feel this can be added later.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Cheerio John</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 12:03 PM James <<a href="mailto:james2432@gmail.com" target="_blank">james2432@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">That is incorrect, some building parts could be bigger if they are surrounding the building as an overhang etc. You can't assume building will be bigger</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu., Jan. 24, 2019, 11:51 a.m. Nate Wessel <<a href="mailto:bike756@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bike756@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Is it sufficient to tag fragments as building:part without
indicating which part or how many stories? If the data is properly
structured, this seems like something that could be handled in
preprocessing by checking for overlapping polygons. It looks like
perhaps we might just have to find the largest part for the
footprint (building=yes) and any intersecting smaller buildings
(building:part=yes).</p>
<p> We might also need to generate some building relations for more
complex features.<br>
</p>
<div class="m_-7131722050954717833m_-745920607072213121m_-6862194445823564595moz-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" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">NateWessel.com</a></span>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="m_-7131722050954717833m_-745920607072213121m_-6862194445823564595moz-cite-prefix">On 1/24/19 11:40 AM, Yaro Shkvorets
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>OSM wiki: <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part</a></div>
<div>It's not in the import wiki though since whoever wrote
it didn't know about it at the time.</div>
<div>Here's what I mean by mapping 3D features in our case.
Say there is a residential tower on a podium. In the
StatsCan data usually you would find both of these
outlines - large podium outline and smaller tower outline
inside it. They would both be tagged with "building=yes"
tag. Obviously we can't upload that as-is. We can either
just remove tower outline leaving only 2D podium outline.
Or, we can tag the tower outline with "building:part=yes".
Someone local can add other tags to it later on, such as
"building:levels", "building:material",
"building:min_level", "addr:housenumber" (if there are two
towers on one podium with different house numbers for
example), etc. I find the latter approach to be the right
one.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="m_-7131722050954717833m_-745920607072213121m_-6862194445823564595gmail_attr">On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:15
AM Nate Wessel <<a href="mailto:bike756@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">bike756@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi Yaro, <br>
</p>
<p>I just had a chance to look at the documentation on the
source data and I wasn't able to find anything about 3D
features or parts of buildings being mapped separately.
Are you guessing here, or is there documentation on this?
If so can you point us to it?<br>
</p>
<p>In any case, the big shapefiles from StatsCan don't
provide enough information to reconstruct any 3D
geometries, so I'd be inclined to remove these from the
import unless they can be brought in from another source
with better documentation / attribute tagging. (i.e. City
of Toronto?)<br>
</p>
<p>Thanks,<br>
</p>
<div class="m_-7131722050954717833m_-745920607072213121m_-6862194445823564595gmail-m_277083992809862550moz-signature">Nate
Wessel<br>
<span style="font-size:10px;color:rgb(119,119,119)">Jack
of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in
Urban Planning<br>
<a href="http://natewessel.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">NateWessel.com</a></span> <br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="m_-7131722050954717833m_-745920607072213121m_-6862194445823564595gmail-m_277083992809862550moz-cite-prefix">On
1/18/19 2:48 PM, Yaro Shkvorets wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Jarek,
<div>There is no question we want this data. I went
through much of it in Toronto and Kingston and I
found it to be very good, consistent and precise.
Time-wise it's somewhat current with 2016 ESRI
imagery (sometimes ahead, sometimes slightly behind)
and is well-aligned with it. It offers 3D features
(when several buildings appear overlapped in the
dataset) but you just need to be familiar with
`building:part` tag to sort through it. I haven't
looked at other provinces but in Ontario I really
have no complaints about dataset quality whatsoever.
Also I don't get Nate's "wildly unsimplified
geometries" comment. IMO geometries are just
perfectly detailed.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div>
</div></div>