[Talk-ca] Canvec/Geobase point feature - Render

Michel Gilbert michcasa at gmail.com
Tue Mar 24 00:05:21 GMT 2009


2009/3/23 Sam Vekemans <acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com>

> Thanks,
> Good call. :-)
>
> The point feature "building=yes"  otherwise known as
>
> point,CODE,2010010,canvec:CODE,2010010
> point,CODE,2010010,building,yes
>
> What it does is show up as a little house icon with JOSM
>
> for the polygons, they show up as nice shapes.. and when clicked on would
> simply state this this is a building.
>
> outer,CODE,2010012,canvec:CODE,2010012
> outer,CODE,2010012,building,yes
> inner,CODE,2010012,canvec:CODE,2010012
> inner,CODE,2010012,building,yes
>
>
> I have not yet received the answer from NRCan about if the location of the
> node is EXACTLY where the building actually is, or is it just shown in the
> general area.  If it is the former, then this information can be taken into
> account.
>

The position of buildings may be "exact" if the acquisition methods was from
stereo-digitization. If it came from map scanning they may have been
displaced for map representation purposes. My guess is 80% of the buildings
in CanVec come from map scanning.

>
> What i can do, and i presume that you all would agree, is to add this
> feature to the "not4osm" folder so then it could be used as an assistant for
> the person who is actually uploading the information.
>
> However,  I would also agree that adding this feature would be similar to
> me using the Aerial imagery and whereever i spot some "THING" that looks
> like a building, quickly tag it as building=yes.  ... this information is
> meaningless to the map user.  ... odds are, that right next to it is some
> other 'building'.   Unless the purpose is clearly stated, we dont need to
> include this feature.
>

Following the new information I received from
tilesathome at openstreetmap.org(i have just forwarded the email to
talk-ca) we may still want them for
mapping purposes.

>
> And YES, there are other point features which need to be looked at to see
> if they are actually useful.  As im going through the sharts, i'll now be
> looking at it.
>

We can list them, then check with the tilesathome at openstreetmap.org talk if
they are part of the render feature.


>
> For example, when the feature lists 9 or so different feature types, the
> general practice for both GeoBase & CanVec is to state "-1" unknown  and "0"
> none ... i would suggest that these features be omitted from the import
> also.
>
> Any thoughts on that?
>

Again it depends if the tilesathome at openstreetmap.org talk confirm that no
render is possible. If we really want them display we can ask them ?

Michel

>
> Cheers,
> Sam
>
> P.S. I was thinking of adding another column to the 11 themes of CanVec
> charts, for "status"
> PPS. I am still finding some features that were accidentally missed when i
> was copying the data from the feature catelogue to the charts, so it's a
> good idea to cross-check with the .pdf catelogue to find out what the actual
> definition was. ~ probably 95% accurate, but always good to check :-)
>
> Hi all,
>>
>
>> Two weeks ago, I worked on the import of CanVec-Buildings using Map
>> feature
>>
> table on the wiki. I noticed at that time that point buildings imported as
>>
> building="yes" did not appear on the osm map. Sam probably rebembered the
>>
> discussion about it. So, I sent my question to the
>>
> tilesathome at openstreetmap.org. It appears that building="yes" will be
>>  <tilesathome at openstreetmap.org>
>
> rendered on the map only if they are polygons.<tilesathome at openstreetmap.org>
>>  <tilesathome at openstreetmap.org>
>
>
>> To conclude, I think there is no reason to import Canvec point building
>>
> unless they have specific functions. It may be true for other point
>>
> features. We should make sure before importing them.
>>
>
>> cheers,
>>
>
>> Michel
>>
>


-- 
Michel Gilbert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20090323/6217e41a/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list