[Imports-us] Portland Metro Area Building Import

[Darrell Fuhriman]

> 
> 1. The main thing that gives me some pause is the data being available
> under the ODbL.

While the irony of this is not lost on me, I’m not sure that it’s our responsibility to worry about theoretical changes. If, at a future date, OSMF decides to make OSM incompatible with itself, that’s their problem. We’re working in the world that actually exists, and the license is compatible with OSM. Plus Metro is explicit about wanting their data in OSM, and has a long history of improving OSM, and thus is likely to accommodate future changes.

> How will you differentiate between what is a Phase 2 section and what
> is Phase 1? Is there a process defined for this?

Well, it’s simple. Phase one is the one building, one address situation. 

Phase  2 is everything else: dealing with multiple address, multiple building situations. The exact plan for this is not yet determined, but it has been suggested that adding a number of address points inside of the building is the right way to start. This may be sufficient for single buildings that have more than one address. For areas where an address point is potentially associated with several possible buildings, the tentative plan is to have ground-truthing expeditions to assign the address points appropriately. These situations are typically in large suburban apartment complexes, and there are a fairly small number of them. Also, the regional governments are continually improving the data, and this one specific situation targeted for data improvement. (Remember, this data is also used for delivering emergency services, so the government has a vested interest in doing so.) We hope to have a plan that will allow improved data to be incorporated with relative ease.

> You mention organizations which will help. What is the mechanical
> process you suggest for helping mappers perform this?

I’m not sure I understand the question being asked here.

Darrell