[HOT] Remote area mapping, clouds, six questions
suzan at suzanreed.com
Thu Apr 30 23:39:48 UTC 2015
ONE Small structures/houses
In remote areas, lightly populated, it's difficult to see if a small structure is a house or something else. I am labeling them all "house". Is this correct? People live in tiny places in Nepal, less that 25' square. They are hard to discern. If it looks like a building, I mark it as a house. Is this good?
TWO Geologic structures
It is difficult to tell geologic structures from houses in some cases. I look to see if there are similar structures in the landscape, if there are fields or agriculture, then mark it as a house as I have been erring on the side of marking houses and having people recognized as being there than not. I want everyone on the map. This may mean I've made mistakes and it's a huge boulder with a shadow. Comments?
THREE Changing other's work
Also, some of my colleagues have marked houses with triangles, not rectangles. Can I correct these?
FOUR Exact building shape
Is the shape of the building important? It's often difficult to tell if it's part of the house or an outbuilding or a shed near the house. Knowing there are people living there seems more important, but if the actual shape is important, I will go back and redo my work.
FIVE Residential vs. all houses marked
Many remote villages are simply marked with a polygon Residential Area. Should I add the structures to these areas?
SIX Up to date BING images?
Also, how recent are the Bing images? In remote areas, much could have been lost to landslides. I also come across areas with clouds. I can go back and map these if the images are refreshed.
More information about the HOT