[Talk-ca] Geobase import by provinces

[Corey Burger]

Ah interesting. I can see you did some boundary cutting, which tends
to produce wierd errors:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.647426&lon=-120.342335&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF

How does this work if you have major roads mapped out but not the
interior ones? There are lots of places on the edges of major cities
that are like this.

BTW, the original mapping in Kamloops was mine, but I don't live there.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:22 PM,  <michcasa at gmail.com> wrote:
> May be I was not clear. I agree with you, user effort is very important and
> we should keep existing OSM data. However Geobase data will provide a very
> very very good coverage and accuracy where no OSM data is available. The use
> of Geobase data will allow the users to work locally to improve the initial
> import and capture other features. For example, I import Geobase data in
> Kamploops area
> (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.687&lon=-120.355&zoom=13) where I kept
> the existing OSM data. You will see that Geobase help to cover the area.
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Nov 20, 2008 11:04pm, Corey Burger <corey.burger at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Given most of the country has at least a few roads, we face a real
>>
>> issue. The last thing we should be doing it ripping out a bunch of
>>
>> mapping that somebody just added. So if we are going to rip out
>>
>> exisiting stuff (and lets be honest, the effort of merging for some s
>>
>> tuff just ain't worth it) then we should do a time stamp check to see
>>
>> if the data was added within the past month or so. This prevents us
>>
>> from dropping a whole load of data on a potential user that might get
>>
>> really annoyed, as has happened in more than one case with the TIGER
>>
>> data. To me, users are far far far more important than geobase data.
>>
>>
>>
>> Corey
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:21 PM,   wrote:
>>
>> > I think the idea is not to replace existing OSM data. Therefore the
>> > import
>>
>> > should be able to insert only new data. I do not think we should exclude
>>
>> > areas. We should detect the changes instead. Richard proposed to start
>> > where
>>
>> > osm data is not present. I agree with him.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Michel
>>
>> >
>>
>> > On Nov 20, 2008 9:57pm, Corey Burger wrote:
>>
>> >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Michel Gilbert wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > Hi osm users,
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > Geobase National Road Network (NRN) datasets are available in shape
>> >> > and
>>
>> >> > GML
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > by provinces or Territories. So, I think we should plan the import by
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > provinces. Furthermore, we should base, the order of conversion, on
>> >> > the
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > dataset content. In fact, there are three levels of NRN content:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > Roads with basic attributes : Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, New
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, Northwest Territories
>> >> > and
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > Nunavut Territory
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> > Roads with basic attributes + street & place names : British Columbia
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Both BC and NS have significant areas that have been mapped,
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> specifically around Victoria, Vancouver and Halifax. Is the data going
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> to be cut with a bounding box to exclude those areas? Are we just
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> going to wipe out existing mapping?
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Corey
>>
>> >>
>>