[Talk-ca] Canvec.osm samples

[Sam Vekemans]

Hi,

Its AWESOME to see that all of the features are available within the SAME
file.   This was something that i attempted todo (last year), but couldn't
figure it out.   This helps as it makes for easy copying over. .. when all
these features are in the same .osm file.  Thanks.

Regarding natural=reef . ... or sub_sea=reef
what's better natural=reef
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/reef or sub_sea=reef?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sub_sea%3Dreef
they are both in the proposed status. .. so im not sure which one is better.

Adding layer=-1 would indicate that it's below the surface.   Also.  I dont
think it needs to be a closed way.  The way it's drawn on Toporama is just
like a natural=cliff (as a line with short angled lines on one side)

Regarding water around the coastline.   I would say that it's fine to add to
OSM. .. and just merge the nodes all the way along the coastline. ..  .. or
remove it?
I would think the exception would be if the waterbody had a name, then it
should be kept.

And overall, the natural=wood works for me.   On Vancouver Island, we used
landuse=wood.  But natural=wood probably is more generic, as the actual
ownership of that area is not known.  All we know is that "in this plot of
land there are trees", beyond that, you need to check other sources.   Which
sounds reasonable.
.. and we cant say that it's "forest" as that would imply some kind of
protection. (which is unknown for this feature).

the tag natural=land for the nodes (where i once put 'place=island'),
natural=land is better, as it might not always be rocks that the map feature
is showing.  it's just "something in the water sticking out permanently"

For waterway=steam.   Yes, the geobase waterway=stream is higher quality, so
if people want to load that instead, there is nothing stopping them.   From
the data it's hard to know if it's a 'creek' 'stream' or 'river' so that
needs to be physically verified.   I would think that the person loading the
data is local, so the would know best. .. but that might not be always the
case.   I dont think it's too much troubble to connect these rivers around
the edges. .. and they may not even need to be connected. ... unless these
rivers are for navigating?  (i also like to add the 'oneway=yes' by looking
at the contours.  Makes for good navigating. IMO.  But what canvec has is
just great :)

..... ah ha! there is something.  Some of the rivers dont have names, but
the name is available from Toporama. .. this can just be added in :-)

For highway=turning_circle the fixme is 'Feature may not exist'.    I would
say it's fine, because it would help people to know that they can still do a
3-point-turn. (and that the road probably does actually end.

ok the big ones

highway=tertiary  is used for the 'orange' lines with toporama
highway=tertiary is also used for the 'reg' lines in toporama
and it looks like 'unpaved is orange' and 'red is paved'

There are no duplicate intersecting nodes!  Way to go team! :-)

The 'red lines' that are visably fatter than the tertiary lines. as
'motorways' (for the ones that have more than 2 lanes)  these would have a
number reference.  (would be a provincial road)
otherwise it's a 'secondary'

'primary_link' does exist, that's awesome!

What i dont see is a "source date" tag.   I guess the assumption is that it
all still exists, unless it's known that it doesnt? by local knowledge which
would know better?


...
Yup.  From digging through the Quebec sample, i cant find anything wrong.
Can anyone else?

Cheers,
Sam



On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Brent Fraser <bfraser at geoanalytic.com>wrote:

> My personal favorite, Waterton Park (82H04)in Alberta, specifically the
> townsite:
>
> 49.0 to 49.1
> -113.9 to -114.0
>
> Best Regards,
> Brent Fraser
>
> Bégin wrote:
> > Bonjour!
> >
> > I'm ready to release some samples to get your feedback on the Canvec.osm
> > product.  I wont be able to release complete NTS datasets because tiling
> > procedure is not completed yet.
> >
> > So, if you send me the bounding box of the area you wish to look at
> > (max  0.1 X 0.1 degrees lat/lon - all include in the same map sheet), I
> > should be able to create the sample an provide it to you and to the
> > community.  I will identify all created sample in the wiki (Canvec page)
> > and they will be made available from NRCan ftp site.
> >
> > I might produce a dozen of datasets, so, first in - first out!
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20100331/845d5e0b/attachment.html>