<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>Does that preserve topology between buildings that share nodes?<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-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">NateWessel.com</a></span>
      <br>
      <br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/26/19 11:31 AM, James wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANk4qi8sJuyYWcYq0oOJKxP5TGxqz8SO0M7JJo3MqXqL0aYk3w@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="auto">no need for scripts, qgis does this fine via the 
        Vector menu -> Geometry tools -> Simplify Geometries
        utility. I simplified it to 20cm with the , but I think 40cm is
        too aggressive.
        <div dir="auto"><br>
        </div>
        <div dir="auto">I already have scripts to compile it into the
          dataformat needed to be served.</div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr">On Sat., Jan. 26, 2019, 11:16 a.m. Nate Wessel
          <<a href="mailto:bike756@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">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>Hi all,</p>
            <p>The wiki page is indeed looking a whole lot better right
              now - my thanks and congrats to everyone who contributed!
              There is a still a ways to go, but we seem to be getting
              there quickly. <br>
            </p>
            <p>I'll echo John in saying that I would appreciate hearing
              from some of the other people who chimed in to express
              their doubts about the import. For my part, I'm not
              satisfied yet - no surprise, I'm sure ;-). I'm thrilled
              that we're talking and working together in the open, and
              that addresses the biggest concern I had with the import. 
              <br>
            </p>
            <p>These are the big issues I see remaining: <br>
            </p>
            <p>1. <b>Validation</b>: Ideally I'd like to see a good
              chunk (more than half) of the data that has been imported
              already validated by another user before we proceed with
              importing more data. Validation is part of the import
              plan, so the import isn't done until validation is done
              anyway. My hope is that this will flag any issues that we
              can fix before moving forward, and give people time to
              chime in on the import plan who maybe haven't already. I
              don't want to see everything imported and only then do we
              start systematically checking the quality of our work, if
              ever. If no one wants to do it now, no one is going to
              want to do it later either, and that doesn't bode well.<br>
            </p>
            <p>2. <b>Simplification</b>: James' analysis showed that
              simplification could save several hundred megabytes (and
              probably more) in Ontario alone. This is totally worth
              doing, but we have to document the process and be very
              careful not to lose valuable data. I believe there was
              also a concern raised about orthogonal buildings being not
              quite orthogonal - this is something that we should handle
              at the same time, again, very carefully. We certainly
              don't want to coerce every building into right angles.
              With respect to James, I'm not sure this is something that
              can be done with a few clicks in QGIS. I would be willing
              to develop a script to handle this, but it would take me
              about a week or two to find the time to do this properly.
              We would need to simultaneously A) simplify straight lines
              B) orthogonalize where possible and C) preserve topology
              between connected buildings. This is not impossible, it
              just takes time and care to do correctly.<br>
            </p>
            <p>3. <b>Speed and Size</b>: To John's point, it seems like
              people certainly are not sticking to the areas they know,
              unless they get around a whole hell of a lot more than I
              do, and yes this is a problem. The whole Toronto region
              was basically imported by two people: DannyMcD seems to
              have done the entire west side of the region (hundreds of
              square kilometers) while zzptichka imported the entire
              east side of the region (again a truly massive area), both
              in the matter of a week or two. They only stopped in the
              middle where there were more buildings already and things
              got a bit more difficult. The middle is where I live, and
              when I saw that wave of buildings coming, I sounded the
              alarms. <br>
              This is way too fast - no one person should be able to
              import the GTA in a couple weeks. A big part of the
              problem, IMO is that the task squares are much too large,
              and allow/require a user to import huge areas at once. At
              the least, some of the task squares in central Toronto are
              impossibly large, including hundreds or thousands of
              buildings already mapped in OSM. Conflation on these, if
              done properly would take the better part of a day, and
              people are likely to get sloppy. <br>
              I would like to see the task squares dramatically reduced
              in size as a way of slowing people down, helping them
              stick to areas they know well, and keeping them focused on
              data quality over quantity. This would also make the
              process much more accessible to local mappers who don't
              already have tons of experience importing.<br>
            </p>
            <p>4. <b>Conflation</b>: I don't think the current
              conflation plan is adequate(ly documented). In practice,
              what people are actually doing may be fine, but I really
              want to see some better thought on how to handle existing
              buildings. Right now the wiki says for example "<i>Before
                merging buildings data switch to OSM layer and see if
                there are any clusters of buildings without any
                meaningful tags you can delete to save time when merging</i>."<br>
              With respect to whoever wrote this, this approach seems to
              value time over data integrity and I just don't think
              that's how OSM should operate. We need to be more careful
              with the existing data, and we need to show that care with
              clear and acceptable guidelines for handling the data that
              countless people have already spent their time
              contributing. We don't do OSM any favours by carelessly
              deleting and replacing data. Help convince me that this
              isn't what's happening.<br>
            </p>
            <p>Until some effort has been made to address these
              concerns, I will continue to oppose this import moving
              forward. And to be clear, I don't want to oppose this
              import - I have too much else I should be focusing on. I
              just don't want to see another shoddy import in Toronto
              (or elsewhere). <br>
            </p>
            <p>Best,<br>
            </p>
            <div class="m_-501377306698867165moz-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" target="_blank"
                  rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">NateWessel.com</a></span>
              <br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div class="m_-501377306698867165moz-cite-prefix">On 1/26/19
              8:49 AM, john whelan wrote:<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote type="cite">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div dir="ltr">
                  <div class="gmail_default"
                    style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">I'm
                    not certain how this addresses the concerns raised
                    by <span
                      style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Andrew
                      Lester and </span></div>
                  <table class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-ajC"
                    cellpadding="0">
                    <tbody>
                      <tr class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-UszGxc
                        m_-501377306698867165gmail-ajv">
                        <td colspan="2"
                          class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-gG"><span
                            class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-gI"></span><br>
                        </td>
                        <td colspan="2"
                          class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-gL"><span
                            class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-gI"><span
                              class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-qu"><span
                                name="Pierre Béland via Talk-ca"
                                class="m_-501377306698867165gmail-gD">Pierre
                                Béland<span class="gmail_default"
                                  style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">,
                                </span></span></span></span></td>
                      </tr>
                    </tbody>
                  </table>
                  <span class="gmail_default"
                    style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">and
                    I seem to recall one other person who expressed
                    concerns.</span></div>
                <div dir="ltr"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
                  </font></div>
                <div dir="ltr"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><span
                      class="gmail_default"
                      style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">I
                      think it is important that their concerns are
                      addressed.</span></font></div>
                <div dir="ltr"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><span
                      class="gmail_default"
                      style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small"><br>
                    </span></font></div>
                <div dir="ltr"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><span
                      class="gmail_default"
                      style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">Perhaps
                      they would be kind enough to comment on whether or
                      not this approach addresses their concerns.</span></font></div>
                <div dir="ltr"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
                  </font></div>
                <div dir="ltr"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><span
                      class="gmail_default">Do we have a concern that
                      some mappers have been importing buildings further
                      than say twenty kilometers from where they live?</span><br>
                  </font><br>
                  <div class="gmail_default"
                    style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small"><br>
                  </div>
                  <div class="gmail_default"
                    style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">Have
                    you found volunteers of local mappers in </div>
                  <div class="gmail_default"
                    style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">
                    <div class="gmail_default">Alberta</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">British Columbia</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Manitoba</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">New Brunswick</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Newfoundland and Labrador</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Northwest Territories</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Nova Scotia</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Nunavut</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Ontario</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Prince Edward Island</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Quebec</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Saskatchewan</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Yukon</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Who will be willing to
                      oversee the import in each province?</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Does this mean the
                      smaller provinces may not see any data?</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">How will you handle
                      cities of say 80,000 population in a smaller
                      province who have an interest in seeing their
                      buildings available but have no idea on how to
                      contact the provincial group?</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">If we go back to earlier
                      times it was a suggestion in talk-ca that we use
                      the single import approach and it was mentioned at
                      the time there didn't seem to be a list of local
                      mapper groups in Canada.</div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">I'm not saying the
                      approach of a single import as far as the import
                      list and talk-ca followed by a procedure of
                      locally organised mappers bringing in the data is
                      wrong I'm just trying to ensure the project moves
                      forward and we are in agreement. </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Thanks </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default"><br>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_default">Cheerio John</div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
              <br>
              <div class="gmail_quote">
                <div dir="ltr" class="m_-501377306698867165gmail_attr">On
                  Sat, 26 Jan 2019 at 00:17, OSM Volunteer stevea <<a
                    href="mailto:steveaOSM@softworkers.com"
                    target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">steveaOSM@softworkers.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">Thanks to some good
                  old-fashioned OSM collaboration, both the <a
                    href="https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Canada_Building_Import"
                    rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Canada_Building_Import</a>
                  and <a
href="https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Building_Canada_2020#NEWS.2C_January_2019"
                    rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Building_Canada_2020#NEWS.2C_January_2019</a>
                  have been updated.  (The latter points to the former).<br>
                  <br>
                  In short, it says there are now step-by-steps to begin
                  an import for a particular province, and that as the
                  steps get fine-tuned (they look good, but might get
                  minor improvements), building a community of at least
                  one or two mappers in each of the provinces with data
                  available, the Tasking Manager can and will lift the
                  "On Hold" or "Stopped" status.<br>
                  <br>
                  Nice going, Canada!<br>
                  <br>
                  See you later,<br>
                  <br>
                  SteveA<br>
                  California<br>
                  _______________________________________________<br>
                  Talk-ca mailing list<br>
                  <a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org"
                    target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
                  <a
                    href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca"
                    rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a><br>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              <br>
              <fieldset
                class="m_-501377306698867165mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
              <pre class="m_-501377306698867165moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
<a class="m_-501377306698867165moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="m_-501377306698867165moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a>
</pre>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          _______________________________________________<br>
          Talk-ca mailing list<br>
          <a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"
            rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
          <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca"
            rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
            moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a><br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>