[Osmf-talk] Mapping trees as buildings (was: Re: Alternative Strategic Plan)

[Damilola Olufemi]

Hello,

I had a similar experience with a Remote Sensing organization here in
Nigeria. I was overwhelmed with questions that I was not prepared enough to
give answers to about data quality on OpenStreetMap. My suggestion would be
that imageries on OpenStreetMap get reviewed more often and be sure that
the imageries are up to date with a good resolution. I once mentioned that
data quality on OpenStreetMap is easily questionable, considering the fact
that it is being contributed by volunteers that have other activities to
focus on irrespective of the amount of training received. Only a few will
be keen on delivering the best. Perhaps volunteers could map while trained
staffs validate. My opinion.

Regards
Damilola

On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 12:30 PM Andy Townsend <ajt1047 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 15/05/2023 05:47, Emerson Rocha via osmf-talk wrote:
> > Let me give a real world example. Weeks ago on unofficial
> > OpenStreetMap Telegram channel  (message
> > https://t.me/OpenStreetMapOrg/101372 ) a mapper from Colombia
> > complained that the buildings added in an area (near volcano Nevado
> > del Ruiz) was visited by local civil defense. The building=yes (added
> > by a human mapper, but geometry suggested
> > Microsoft/buildingFootprints) actually was a... tree. Guayacanes and
> > Yarumos to be more exact. He was pissed off on the chat, saying it
> > already complained in the past.
>
>
> For the avoidance of doubt this was a mistake by a human mapper
> apparently from the same country (and with a bit of experience - 1000
> edits or so) using "RapiD 1.1.9".  It wasn't a new contributor to OSM
> attending a mapathon organised by an NGO abroad.  There appear to be no
> changeset comments on their changes suggesting that people have noticed
> problems with "trees as buildings" or similar.  If a complaint was made,
> it doesn't appear to have been made to this mapper.  Put bluntly,
> they're not going to know how problematic tools like "RapiD" can be
> unless someone tells them.  That's not to say that RapiD aren't really
> useful at finding missing buildings; just that they will also find some
> false positives too (a quick scan locally (UK) finds around 20 missing
> sheds and small agricultural buildings that no-one has bothered to add -
> and one that appears to be a bit of scrap metal, that isn't.
>
> I'd suggest (and will suggest on Telegram) that a changeset comment
> helping them understand how to use tools such as this would be the best
> initial approach.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
> (as usual writing here in a personal capacity, and apologies from
> dragging this thread even further from "strategic" things)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20230515/ac661f91/attachment.htm>