Hi, I'll add my 2 cents :-)<div><br></div><div>Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) admits that YES, their data has 'known' and 'unknown' inaccuracies. So their aim is to create a national dataset of 100% accurate collection of all provincial datasets on a 'regular basis'. (just as DEC lands Db is only as accurate as when surveyed) and 'Officially' the NRCan Survey (even if incorrect) has legal ground for Official ownership. </div>
<div><br></div><div>This was long before OpenStreetMap came in and tripped them off their toes. </div><div><br></div><div><div><div>However, any 'reasonable person' would know to re-examine the original 'official' survey. Putting the source as k="canvec:source" v="CanVec_Feature_Catalogue_Edition_1_0_2.pdf" should be sufficient to detour anyone from editing it without good reason. And a "note:outdated survay" should be acceptable. As the other source tag of k="canvec:VALDATE", v="YYYYMMDD" is also important to have. :-)</div>
</div></div><div><br></div><div><div>And so, what is true with NRCan is that each node has a unique "UUID" or NID. So then when changes are available, a script can be run comparing the status of the UUID. (Then an AutoMatch routeen can be run, to match up existing OSM data, and produce a Diff file, which gets manually integrated). See (geobase2osm script).[1]<br>
</div></div>
<div><br></div><div>Using a separate login a user can prefix their name with "geobase:" or whatever organization data comes from, so then these main edits can be viewed and removed if needed. (But only by the user themselves. As everyone (theoretically) takes "ownership" for the data that they supply to OSM. And no data (Big Fish or small fish, red fish or blue fish) should be any less important. :-)</div>
<div><br></div><div>So our only solution is to utilize the awesome power of OpenStreetMap when dealing with any data to be imported. We have what any government or private company (erm Google) doesn't have. Each and every user can go onto the map, and edit it so it's "more right" if they dispute anything, they can simply message each other, and say "hey, why did you draw this line here?" and from there people can make the reasonable decisions based on the data that most accurately represents the condition on the ground, and note the inconsistencies. </div>
<div><br></div><div>In Canada, once the NRCan data is all imported (goal: end of 2009), OSM will have all the political boundaries, all the park boundaries, all the hydro lines... buildings and residential areas. ....etc.. </div>
<div><br></div><div>We will then have 2 parallel databases, NRCan and OSM containing the same data. ... 1 day later, OSM changes, and 6 months later NRCan changes. </div>
<div><br></div><div>The point is, is that not 1 single way is permanent, and is always moving regardless of who (a government employee) or a (government employee on their free time) is working with the data. </div><div>
So as time lapses, what we can then do is simply go direct to the source on the ground... and verify (when needed) if these items are correct. By creating a .shp file, using the simple program shp-to-osm.jar <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp2osm" target="_blank">[2]</a> of the area of interest, (logging in as a organization:user) user we can view what the latest data shows, and directly compare it with OSM. Zooming in and selecting only the area of interest.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The point is, for each and every shape file which is available to us (from NRCan or whatever source) we will be doing the exact same thing. -Viewing the existing OSM data, and directly comparing it with the data to be imported. and where ever there is conflict, the person who drew in those OSM lines gets contacted. (ie. importing building outlines) if that person cannot be reached, then i simply remove those buildings from the (to be imported) shape file. And only "improve" and not "bring down" the value of that non-reachable contributor. For example, the particular building is a 10 sided shape, where the user only drew it in as 4 sides... but has the name right. It would be appropriate to use the name, and fix up the shape. </div>
<div>However, if the opposite was true, and the imported shape was just a square, it would not be appropriate to remove the existing building.</div><div><br></div><div>We, (as in the OSM Community) CANNOT state that this map is official. It is only Official (to the OSM community). We are a international community which is bound together by our common goal of making a map which is free for everyone to use and contribute. The aim is to say "Hey if you see an error on the map, don't blame me, fix it yourself." ... "But first, please the courteous and just ask for help".</div>
<div><br></div><div>When and IF government agencies/private companies decide that they want to encourage their staff to contribute to OSM. .. We have an agreement, ODbL<a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License" target="_blank">[3]</a> , where we want to keep the database open on a 2-way street. Ie. your staff all need to contribute as if they were doing so independently. You can pull a feed from the database, work on it, but then you need to give back to the database your changes. As well as provide a way that any user can contact you and question your motivation for making changes.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If all users agree to this basic principle when they register, we will have a database which can actually become "trusteed" Why? Here's why?</div><div><br></div><div>IF/When a government agency/private company does encourage their staff to contribute to OSM.. the aim for that company is the same as for an individual. That is, to make the most accurate map. It can only be "trusted" because the "individual employees" are acting as "individuals" but ALSO as "employees in good standing". (they obviously don't want to get fired). However, the company can be "trusted" only because of "reputation" of being in "good standing" with the community. And knowing that the data they provide is free for anyone to change.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So it all boils down to "TRUST" do we TRUST that the government/ private company to hold and maintain an up-to-date accurate map of the world? </div><div><br></div><div>Well, we "Trust" Google with our email messages (im sending from). In Good faith, that they are going to-do what they say they are going to-do.</div>
<div><br></div><div>And so, for maps; Google contracts out a company (set of companies) to provide a map of the world. And people TRUST the map, as they TRUST gmail, in good faith. </div><div>However, what Google knows is that OSM does exist, and that our map is available for Google to use. HOWEVER, the biggest difference, is in actual ownership. Who "owns" the data.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I was looking at a recent interview with <span style="border-collapse:collapse">Reid Hoffman <span style="border-collapse:separate">the founder of "LinkedIN" and he said that the way that he looks at it, and how Facebook should also look at it in the same way. </span></span></div>
<div>"The users who contribute to the database, should take ownership of the data they provide" <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/05/read-hoffman-tells-charlie-rose-every-individual-is-now-an-entrepreneur/" target="_blank">[4]</a> </div>
<div><br></div><div>So in the case of maps, the users who contribute should actually "own" their edits, and submit their data in "good faith" that when interacting with other users, the common goal is to make a better map & learn from each-other.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So my hopes with writing this long essay is to share. 1 - the value of this new database license. 2 - the value of ownership of data 3 - the known fact that no single map database should be treated as an island. That we are all better off if we can all contribute to this massive project.</div>
<div><br></div><div>And finally, a fact that we have friends who actually work for NRCan, but are helping out OSM and contributing ideas both on their free time, and during work (where appropriate). So on behalf of the OpenSreetMap community, I want to thank Natural Resources Canada for their efforts so far. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Best Regards,</div><div>and :Happy Mapping</div><div>Sam Vekemans</div><div>Across Canada Trails </div><div><br></div><div>[1] <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geobase2osm" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geobase2osm</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>[2] <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp2osm" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp2osm</a></div><div><br></div><div>[3] <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>[4] <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/05/read-hoffman-tells-charlie-rose-every-individual-is-now-an-entrepreneur/" target="_blank">http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/05/read-hoffman-tells-charlie-rose-every-individual-is-now-an-entrepreneur/</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>P.S. On request, I can record this message as a Video which might help explain the concept better.</div>