[Talk-ca] NRN Fort McMurray area data

[michcasa at gmail.com]

On Jan 18, 2009 11:08pm, Steve Singer <ssinger_pg at sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Michel Gilbert wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Steve,
>
>
>
> Good work. Your osm file looks great. I am going to use your work to  
tackle
>
> the nrn import with FME.
>
>
>
>
> Sounds good.
>
> Let me know if you want the latest versions of the geobase2osm.py script.
>
> Is FME able to match roads between the two sets or were you going to use  
road matcher for that?
>
FME has tools to compare geometries and attributes. From previous  
experience, I found matching processes are very difficult to achieve. If  
the features are distanced, or overlaped, or if the representations are  
different it will be hard to find a match. Anyway, I built one FME  
application for road matching. It will also snap the new ways ti existing  
ones. I will start a new thread about my whole process in a new talk.
>
>
> I would also be good to know what areas your working on so we don't both  
import the same area. My thinking is that I'll continue working on  
importing the rest of Alberta in managable sized chunks.

I will concentrate in British Columbia. NRN Geobase in BC has road/street  
names. Our work, one day will merge in the mountains, along the boundaries.

Michel
>
>
>
> Michel
>
>
>
> 2009/1/18 Steve Singer ssinger_pg at sympatico.ca>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009, James Ewen wrote:
>
>
>
>
> As reported previously, sometimes the RoadMatcher is thinking roads
>
> that intersect at 90 degrees are a match, and is leaving them out.
>
> There are a number of these that I'll have to go back and insert.
>
>
>
>
> This is expected. When you run roadmatcher on a dataset it divides the
>
> roads into three categories. 'Matched', 'Standalone' and 'unknown'. The
>
> unknown ones are roads where roadmatcher is unsure if there is a match or
>
> not. I am only importing 'standalone' roads since we seemed to think that
>
> it was better to leave out the unknowns vs having many duplicate roads.
>
> It would be nice if it could a better job matching.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Here's where OSM data is going to surpass GeoBase. The question
>
> remains though, how to teach the RoadMatcher to recognize that these
>
> two circular routes are the same roadway?
>
>
>
>
> In this case RoadMatcher actually did detect that they were the same road,
>
> that should have been excluded from the output. However there is a bug in
>
> the exclusion code my geobase2osm.py.
>
>
>
> What happened was that road matcher matched part of the road, but it split
>
> the NRN segment. One part was matched, the other part was standalone. My
>
> script incorrectly declared the entire segment as standalone (which is
>
> incorrect, it should have been excluded from the import). I've fixed the
>
> script.
>
>
>
> It looks like two geobase road segements suffered from this.
>
>
>
> 6972a46cf13841a88c89ff40c49cd498
>
> 948359a6ff024551aa1a07cec21c818b
>
>
>
> I will manually clean this up tomorrow sometime.
>
>
>
> Thanks for spotting this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=56.65477&lon=-111.32785&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF
>
>
>
>
> James
>
> VE6SRV
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Talk-ca mailing list
>
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Talk-ca mailing list
>
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20090119/5f128109/attachment.html>