[Talk-ca] I'm not afraid of the Google Monster (was Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands)

Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com
Tue Mar 10 07:42:33 GMT 2009


Hi, I'll add my 2 cents :-)
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) admits that YES, their data has 'known' and
'unknown' inaccuracies.   So their aim is to create a national dataset of
100% accurate collection of all provincial datasets on a 'regular basis'.
(just as DEC lands Db is only as accurate  as when surveyed) and
'Officially' the NRCan Survey (even if incorrect) has legal ground for
Official ownership.

This was long before OpenStreetMap came in and tripped them off their toes.

However, any 'reasonable person' would know to re-examine the original
'official' survey.  Putting the source as k="canvec:source"
v="CanVec_Feature_Catalogue_Edition_1_0_2.pdf" should be sufficient to
detour anyone from editing it without good reason.   And a "note:outdated
survay" should be acceptable. As the other source tag of k="canvec:VALDATE",
v="YYYYMMDD" is also important to have. :-)

And so, what is true with NRCan is that each node has a unique "UUID" or
NID.  So then when changes are available, a script can be run comparing the
status of the UUID.  (Then an AutoMatch routeen can be run, to match up
existing OSM data, and produce a Diff file, which gets manually integrated).
 See (geobase2osm script).[1]

Using a separate login a user can prefix their name with "geobase:" or
whatever organization data comes from, so then these main edits can be
viewed and removed if needed.  (But only by the user themselves.   As
everyone (theoretically) takes "ownership" for the data that they supply to
OSM.  And no data (Big Fish or small fish, red fish or blue fish) should be
any less important. :-)

So our only solution is to utilize the awesome power of OpenStreetMap when
dealing with any data to be imported.  We have what any government or
private company (erm Google) doesn't have.  Each and every user can go onto
the map, and edit it so it's "more right"  if they dispute anything, they
can simply message each other, and say "hey, why did you draw this line
here?" and from there people can make the reasonable decisions based on the
data that most accurately represents the condition on the ground, and note
the inconsistencies.

In Canada, once the NRCan data is all imported (goal: end of 2009),  OSM
will have all the political boundaries, all the park boundaries,  all the
hydro lines... buildings and residential areas. ....etc..

We will then have 2 parallel databases, NRCan and OSM containing the same
data.  ... 1 day later, OSM changes, and 6 months later NRCan changes.

The point is, is that not 1 single way is permanent, and is always moving
regardless of who (a government employee) or a (government employee on their
free time) is working with the data.
So as time lapses, what we can then do is simply go direct to the source on
the ground... and verify (when needed) if these items are correct.  By
creating a .shp  file, using the simple program shp-to-osm.jar
[2]<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp2osm>of the area of
interest, (logging in as a organization:user) user we can
view what the latest data shows, and directly compare it with OSM.  Zooming
in and selecting only the area of interest.

The point is, for each and every shape file which is available to us (from
NRCan or whatever source) we will be doing the exact same thing.  -Viewing
the existing OSM data, and directly comparing it with the data to be
imported.  and where ever there is conflict, the person who drew in those
OSM lines gets contacted.  (ie. importing building outlines)  if that person
cannot be reached, then i simply remove those buildings from the (to be
imported) shape file. And only "improve" and not "bring down" the value of
that non-reachable contributor.  For example, the particular building is a
10 sided shape, where the user only drew it in as 4 sides... but has the
name right.  It would be appropriate to use the name, and fix up the shape.

However, if the opposite was true, and the imported shape was just a square,
it would not be appropriate to remove the existing building.

We, (as in the OSM Community) CANNOT state that this map is official.  It is
only Official (to the OSM community).  We are a international community
which is bound together by our common goal of making a map which is free for
everyone to use and contribute.  The aim is to say "Hey if you see an error
on the map, don't blame me, fix it yourself." ... "But first, please
the courteous and just ask for help".

When and IF government agencies/private companies decide that they want to
encourage their staff to contribute to OSM. .. We have an agreement,
ODbL[3]<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License> ,
where we want to keep the database open on a 2-way street. Ie. your staff
all need to contribute as if they were doing so independently.  You can pull
a feed from the database, work on it, but then you need to give back to the
database your changes.  As well as provide a way that any user can contact
you and question your motivation for making changes.

If all users agree to this basic principle when they register, we will have
a database which can actually become "trusteed"  Why? Here's why?

IF/When a government agency/private company does encourage their staff to
contribute to OSM.. the aim for that company is the same as for an
individual.  That is, to make the most accurate map.  It can only be
"trusted" because the "individual employees" are acting as "individuals" but
ALSO as "employees in good standing".  (they obviously don't want to get
fired).  However, the company can be "trusted" only because of "reputation"
of being in "good standing" with the community.  And knowing that the data
they provide is free for anyone to change.

So it all boils down to "TRUST"  do we TRUST that the government/ private
company  to hold and maintain an up-to-date accurate map of the world?

Well, we "Trust" Google with our email messages (im sending from).  In Good
faith, that they are going to-do what they say they are going to-do.

And so, for maps;  Google contracts out a company (set of companies) to
provide a map of the world.   And people TRUST the map, as they TRUST gmail,
in good faith.
However, what Google knows is that OSM does exist, and that our map is
available for Google to use.  HOWEVER, the biggest difference, is in actual
ownership.  Who "owns" the data.

I was looking at a recent interview with Reid Hoffman the founder of
"LinkedIN" and he said that the way that he looks at it, and how Facebook
should also look at it in the same way.
"The users who contribute to the database, should take ownership of the data
they provide" [4]<http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/05/read-hoffman-tells-charlie-rose-every-individual-is-now-an-entrepreneur/>


So in the case of maps, the users who contribute should actually "own" their
edits, and submit their data in "good faith" that when interacting with
other users, the common goal is to make a better map & learn from
each-other.

So my hopes with writing this long essay is to share.  1 - the value of this
new database license.  2 - the value of ownership of data 3 - the known fact
that no single map database should be treated as an island.  That we are all
better off if we can all contribute to this massive project.

And finally, a fact that we have friends who actually work for NRCan, but
are helping out OSM and contributing ideas both on their free time, and
during work (where appropriate).  So on behalf of the OpenSreetMap
community, I want to thank Natural Resources Canada for their efforts so
far.

Best Regards,
and :Happy Mapping
Sam Vekemans
Across Canada Trails

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geobase2osm

[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shp2osm

[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License

[4]
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/05/read-hoffman-tells-charlie-rose-every-individual-is-now-an-entrepreneur/

P.S. On request, I can record this message as a Video which might help
explain the concept better.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20090310/098ee102/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list