<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server">
<!-- converted from text --><style><!-- .EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; padding-left: 4pt; border-left: #800000 2px solid; } --></style>
</head>
<body>
<div>
<div dir="auto" style="direction:ltr; margin:0; padding:0; font-family:sans-serif; font-size:11pt; color:black">
+1<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto" style="direction:ltr; margin:0; padding:0; font-family:sans-serif; font-size:11pt; color:black">
<div dir="auto" style="direction:ltr; margin:0; padding:0; font-family:sans-serif; font-size:11pt; color:black">
Sent from Galaxy S7</div>
<br>
</div>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Tim Elrick <osm@elrick.de><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 5, 2019 7:09:11 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> James; Begin Daniel<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Talk-CA OpenStreetMap<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building outlines for Canada</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Hi Daniel and James,<br>
<br>
Sounds good, Daniel. Looking forward to see your tool. However, the Open <br>
Building Database data for Montreal looks pretty good in terms of number <br>
of nodes and orthogonalization. I am still working on how to break up <br>
the building blocks, however, with much less time on my hand than you <br>
seem to have. I will keep you posted as soon as I had some success.<br>
<br>
Thanks, James, for your kind offer. If we decide to import, which we <br>
will discuss on the local list first, we then will provide an import <br>
plan and will get back to for the technical implementation of providing <br>
the tiles on the tasking manager.<br>
<br>
I suggest, we continue this conversation on the Montréal list <br>
(challenging my French capabilities).<br>
<br>
Tim<br>
<br>
On 2019-03-04 19:48, James wrote:<br>
I could serve the output using the microdataservice and the osncanada<br>
task manager(multiple tasks)<br>
<br>
<a href="https://github.com/osmottawa/micro-data-service">https://github.com/osmottawa/micro-data-service</a><br>
<br>
On Mon., Mar. 4, 2019, 7:16 p.m. Begin Daniel, <jfd553@hotmail.com<br>
<<a href="mailto:jfd553@hotmail.com">mailto:jfd553@hotmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Tim, ____<br>
<br>
I have plenty of free time and I am interested in this import. I am<br>
about to complete a pre-processing tool that seems to<br>
“orthogonalize” building footprints pretty well using FME (safe<br>
software). I plan to present/discuss its functionalities next week<br>
on this list (vertex filtering, ensuring right angles, sorting<br>
building according to processing results, etc.). I have not examined<br>
how to break up building blocks into single units yet but I am<br>
interested to include it in the pre-processing tool if it is<br>
possible.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Daniel____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
*From:*Tim Elrick [<a href=""></a>mailto:osm@elrick.de <<a href="mailto:osm@elrick.de">mailto:osm@elrick.de</a>>]<br>
*Sent:* Saturday, March 02, 2019 19:58<br>
*To:* talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <<a href="mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org">mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] Microsoft has released its building<br>
outlines for Canada____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Hi Steve,____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
As for Montreal: We will create an import plan on the wiki as soon<br>
as we have expanded the discussion about the Montreal import from<br>
our local face-to-face group to the Montreal OSM list and agreed on<br>
importing. Before we do this, we wanted to test the feasibility of<br>
the pre-processing first, as it involves quite some postgis coding<br>
to break up the building blocks into single buildings. Only<br>
thereafter, we will suggest an import (or not), depending on the<br>
feasibility of extracting single buildings. Otherwise we will follow<br>
the hand-drawn approach as usual (and as it is done on a daily basis<br>
at the moment by a couple of OSMappers).____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
The Microsoft data set might still be useful for remote areas. Let's<br>
explore this altogether.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Cheers,____<br>
<br>
Tim____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2019-03-02 19:17, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:____<br>
<br>
On Mar 2, 2019, at 3:47 PM, John Whelan<jwhelan0112@gmail.com> <br>
<<a href="mailto:jwhelan0112@gmail.com">mailto:jwhelan0112@gmail.com</a>> wrote:____<br>
<br>
Two years ago a group of Toronto mappers submitted the City of <br>
Toronto Open Data license to the LWG to see if it was acceptable. I <br>
assume they meant to import things such as building outlines. I also <br>
assumed as I think others did that this meant Toronto mappers were happy <br>
to import the City of Toronto's data especially as it was discussed on <br>
talk-ca first.____<br>
<br>
Historical info is appreciated for context, however, the LWG found <br>
Canada-wide city-by-city submissions for ODbL-compliance burdensome, <br>
given LWG's limited bandwidth. Assuming about events in the past is <br>
unhelpful, first because it is assuming (seldom helpful) and second, <br>
these events are in the past. How Toronto imported (building) data <br>
can't really help us first understand and second improve from what we <br>
learn until we know what we learned. That isn't presented here, but it <br>
could be.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
More recently Nate who currently lives in Toronto feels that <br>
this should be discussed once more in Toronto to work out what is <br>
desired etc.____<br>
<br>
I agree with Nate. Perhaps first in Toronto, perhaps wider in <br>
talk-ca. "Once more" seems limiting, though it's possible it could <br>
suffice.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Tim I think is organising Montreal open data import.____<br>
<br>
Please consider adding this (and links to user: wiki or Talk pages) <br>
to the active Import wiki. Generate communication using our media!____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
I note that Nate and Tim have different ideas about what should <br>
be imported. One is happy with bay windows and I think the other feels <br>
they should be removed.____<br>
<br>
More discussion often yields consensus, especially as it "goes <br>
wide" (or as wide as is practical).____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
We also have Pierre who is unhappy because the imported <br>
building outlines available have too many corners that are not right <br>
angles.____<br>
<br>
More discussion often yields consensus.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
The local Ottawa mappers are content with their Open Data <br>
import and find the data quality acceptable even though Pierre has <br>
expressed reservations about it.____<br>
<br>
More discussion often yields consensus. Wide area (large cities, <br>
province-wide, nationwide) imports are not easy to achieve consensus but <br>
can often reach something approaching one as data are entered, not <br>
liked, improved, liked better, et cetera. These are often an <br>
interactive, iterative process.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Someone in Manitoba? mentioned there were no building outlines <br>
released for Manitoba? I apologise if I have the province name wrong.____<br>
<br>
It is spelled correctly. I am not Canadian and I know that; it <br>
isn't hard to spell-check Manitoba.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
So we have a mixture of expectations which is only to be <br>
expected in a large group.____<br>
<br>
More discussion often yields consensus. It might be part "mixture <br>
of expectations" but I'm sure that everyone will agree that "high <br>
quality data entering OSM" is expected. What can be difficult is "what <br>
do we mean by high quality?" (in addition to establishing and <br>
communicating clear goals for the importation of the data).____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Microsoft's Open Data provides another source of Open Data <br>
which might meet Pierre's data quality expectations. They may meet <br>
Nate's. All provinces and Territories now have Open Data building <br>
outlines available.____<br>
<br>
OK, thanks for the clarification that a "union" of these datasets <br>
(Stats Canada-produced building data + Microsoft-produced building data) <br>
provide an "all provinces and Territories dataset." That truly is <br>
helpful as it makes it clear that "if Set A doesn't have your province's <br>
or Territory's building data, Set B will."____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and Yukon have populations of <br>
around 35,000 people. Realistically I don't think they have a group of <br>
local OSM mappers.____<br>
<br>
Please don't "write them off" so easily. Not only does it seem <br>
"not nice," it may not be true. A better approach may be to actively <br>
develop community there, difficult as that might seem. I believe there <br>
is usually Internet available there in the villages (sometimes via <br>
clever and state-of-the-art methodologies) and it may be as simple as <br>
"shaking the trees" of the right people, then "they'll take it from <br>
there."____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
Essentially the problem now we no longer have a Canada wide <br>
consensus on what is acceptable____<br>
<br>
More discussion often yields consensus.____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
...appears to be how do you identify local mappers across <br>
Canada and how far away can a "local" mapper be to be considered local <br>
since it is the local mappers who make the decision about what is <br>
acceptable and I think it is they who have to drive the import process.____<br>
<br>
There are no such "hard and fast" rules as this. I think you're on <br>
the right track that "hinterland" (I do not mean that disparagingly, <br>
rather more like "far away from others") OSM volunteers "drive the <br>
import process," so I again encourage you and others to "better develop" <br>
this community and let them, teach them, encourage them to "do what they <br>
will."____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
I'm sure if a local group would like to contact me we can find <br>
resources to assist them if required.____<br>
<br>
Excellent that you volunteer to be a "point person." While it's <br>
important that people "step up" like that, wider, open communication <br>
(here in talk-ca, the wiki page, the wiki's Discussion tab / talk <br>
page...) is also to be encouraged. In short, you can't cast the net too <br>
wide, so be broad in the reach to do so. De-centralize while developing <br>
both breadth and width (the whole country, at province-wide and <br>
city/vllage-wide levels) as well as "experts/consultants who are <br>
available" to answer questions and provide directional guidance and <br>
technical assistance. Good luck!____<br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
SteveA____<br>
<br>
California____<br>
<br>
___________________________________________________<br>
<br>
Talk-ca mailing list____<br>
<br>
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <<a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org">mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a>>____<br>
<br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca____">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca____</a><br>
<br>
__ __<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-ca mailing list<br>
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <<a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org">mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</span></font>
</body>
</html>