[Imports] Import of forests, farmland and other types of land cover for Sweden generated from Naturvårdsverkets Nationella Marktäckedata 2018
Christoph Hormann
osm at imagico.de
Mon Apr 15 20:34:47 UTC 2019
On Sunday 14 April 2019, Grigory Rechistov via Imports wrote:
> Dear OSM community,
> This is an announcement and request for comments, suggestions, and
> approval of land cover information data import for the territory of
> Sweden.
>
> [...]
Had a quick look over your description.
My general recommendation would be not to import any landcover data in
OSM generated through automated classification of satellite imagery.
There are multiple reasons for this, the most significant probably is
that this is inherently incompatible with the tagging system and the
way how things are mapped in OSM.
Part of this stems from the very idea of closed landcover classification
systems as not being meant to positively identify certain areas but
assigning essentially the least unlikely of a set of potential classes
to every point on the surface.
Another part of this is due to many of the tagging distinctions we have
in OSM - like natural=wood vs. natural=scrub, natural=scree vs.
natural=bare_rock, landuse=commercial vs. landuse=industrial or
leisure=park vs. leisure=garden being indistinguishable based on
spectral characteristics alone.
Therefore you'd not just be importing data into the existing OSM tagging
system, you'd import the whole classification system and philosophy
behind it.
Don't get me wrong - i am not opposed to using automated analysis of
open data satellite imagery for more efficient mapping in OSM. This
has a lot of potential. But this has to be done specifically for OSM
and for the tagging and mapping standards we have and it has to be
controlled by the mapper. There is no shortcut to this by importing
data sets created for a completely different purpose with completely
different goals.
--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/
More information about the Imports
mailing list