[Imports] Import of Flemish Government data (building footprints and addresses)

[Pieter Vander Vennet]

Hello everyone,

OP again.

It seems like we have reached a consensus on all the issues and that we can
start with small-scale tests, which will grow slowly until we have full and
continuous data integration.

I would like to thank everyone involved for the feedback and different
perspectives on the issues and especially the Dutch' to provide a glimpse
into their workflow, which will resemble our own process.

Have fun mapping!

Bye!
Pieter Vander Vennet


Op ma 5 nov. 2018 om 23:26 schreef Gertjan Idema <g.idema at zonnet.nl>:

> I'm sorry to hear that and I'm sure this was not the intention of writer
> of the changeset comment.
>
> In this particular case, the new mapper changed the building outline to
> the top view base on aerial imaging, which was quite different from the
> footprint due to parallax. As far as I can find, the changeset has been
> reverted based on mutual consent between the two mappers. But I don't if
> the difference between the top view on aerial imaging and the foot print
> was explained to the new mapper.
>
> Mapping discussions like these are inevitable in OSM, independent
> whether the data comes from government data or not. The quality of the
> government data in the Netherlands is very good. But if we are aware
> that the government data is incorrect, we put the correct data in OSM
> and inform the municipality so they can update their database. The
> response differs between municipalities, but is generally improving.
>
> One thing that we might improve in our presentation of government data
> is to take the 'under investigation' flag into account and present this
> information to the mappers. Unfortunately that field is currently not
> available in the official WFS service.
>
> On 05/11/2018 21:31, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > On 05/11/2018 19:35, Gertjan Idema wrote:
> >>
> >> We have no issue with mappers being afraid to touch buildings because
> >> of the building id's.
> >>
> >
> > You do have cases of new mappers being told that they are "doing it
> > wrong" because they try and update OSM data that is (at least
> > partially) regularly updated by imported government data, though.
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/63105329 is one that springs
> > to mind (mainly because it's a buolding I've visited a very long time
> > ago).  Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, this mapper
> > didn't feel able to continue in OSM.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imports mailing list
> > Imports at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports mailing list
> Imports at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20181109/34b82805/attachment.html>