<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;">Two years ago a group of Toronto mappers
submitted the City of Toronto Open Data license to the LWG to see if it
was acceptable. I assume they meant to import things such as building
outlines. I also assumed as I think others did that this meant Toronto
mappers were happy to import the City of Toronto's data especially as it
was discussed on talk-ca first.<br><br>More recently Nate who currently
lives in Toronto feels that this should be discussed once more in
Toronto to work out what is desired etc.<br><br>Tim I think is
organising Montreal open data import.<br><br>I note that Nate and Tim
have different ideas about what should be imported. One is happy with
bay windows and I think the other feels they should be removed.<br><br>We
also have Pierre who is unhappy because the imported building outlines
available have too many corners that are not right angles.<br><br>The
local Ottawa mappers are content with their Open Data import and find
the data quality acceptable even though Pierre has expressed
reservations about it.<br><br>Someone in Manitoba? mentioned there were
no building outlines released for Manitoba? I apologise if I have the
province name wrong.<br><br>So we have a mixture of expectations which
is only to be expected in a large group.<br><br>Microsoft's Open Data
provides another source of Open Data which might meet Pierre's data
quality expectations. They may meet Nate's. All provinces and
Territories now have Open Data building outlines available.<br><br>Northwest
Territories, Nunavut, and Yukon have populations of around 35,000
people. Realistically I don't think they have a group of local OSM
mappers.<br><br>The next four provinces in size range between 142,000 to
1,275,000. <br><br>The larger provinces contain Toronto, Montreal,
Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton.<br><br>Essentially the problem now we
no longer have a Canada wide consensus on what is acceptable appears to
be how do you identify local mappers across Canada and how far away can a
"local" mapper be to be considered local since it is the local mappers
who make the decision about what is acceptable and I think it is they
who have to drive the import process.<br><br>I'm sure if a local group
would like to contact me we can find resources to assist them if
required.<br><br>Cheerio John<br><br><span>OSM Volunteer stevea wrote on
2019-03-02 5:52 PM:</span><br><blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:94E0F163-668D-41A1-A2AB-78E0805829B3@softworkers.com"><pre wrap="">No, I am not planning to import these. However, your notification that the data are available seems to be encouraging the data to BE imported into OSM. Of course, there is a "more correct" way to do that.
Perhaps I might encourage you to sharpen up your intention for notifying talk-ca of the availability of the data. Are they an additional source to ENTER into OSM? (Thus importing them). Or, perhaps you mean them to be a set of "comparison data" which might be used to verify or compare against the "other" data. Although, then, should there be a discrepancy, the question becomes "which are (more) correct?" I didn't see any of these issues addressed by your notification, which feel likes it begs these questions. Thank you in advance for any follow-up that better clarifies.
Late notice just before I clicked Send: thanks to James for letting us know here that the data are ODbL and therefore OSM-compatible. (One down, perhaps a bit more to go).
SteveA
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">On Mar 2, 2019, at 2:40 PM, john whelan <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jwhelan0112@gmail.com"><jwhelan0112@gmail.com></a> wrote:
Why are you planning to import it?
Cheerio John
On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 5:26 PM OSM Volunteer stevea, <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:steveaOSM@softworkers.com"><steveaOSM@softworkers.com></a> wrote:
A responsible complement to this would be a link to license information, a wiki page about these data, and perhaps an Import Plan should those data actually be asserted to be worthy of being responsibly imported into OSM.
SteveA
California
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">On Mar 2, 2019, at 2:17 PM, john whelan <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jwhelan0112@gmail.com"><jwhelan0112@gmail.com></a> wrote:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/Microsoft/CanadianBuildingFootprints">https://github.com/Microsoft/CanadianBuildingFootprints</a>
So now there are two Open Data sources for building outlines in Canada.
Cheerio John
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a>
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""></pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""></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>