[Talk-ca] Converted Stats Can Boundaries files.

[Bégin, Daniel]

Hi Michael, 
 
you are right - for the moment, because ...
 
It should be available on GeoBase before the end of summer - or soon after !-)
 
- Administrative boundaries/names for levels 6-8;
- Geometries provided by local authorities, except for AB;
 
 
About accuracy comparison with StatCan... 
The accuracy could be/not be the same, I haven't check yet. It depends on StatCan data provider, but I know they are legitimately not targeting accuracy.
 
Daniel

________________________________

From: Michael Barabanov [mailto:michael.barabanov at gmail.com] 
Sent: 27 juillet 2010 16:28
To: Bégin, Daniel
Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Converted Stats Can Boundaries files.


Answering my own question.. no, doesn't seem like GeoBase contains boundaries for cities (http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/admin/index.html).
So StatsCan seems to be the only source of vector data for this?


On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Michael Barabanov <michael.barabanov at gmail.com> wrote:


	Hi Daniel,
	
	Are you saying that GeoBase actually contains (let's say) city boundaries/names, and those are probably geometrically more accurate? 


	On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Bégin, Daniel <Daniel.Begin at rncan-nrcan.gc.ca> wrote:
	

		I agree with Richard,
		
		Here is more information...
		
		The first Osm Canadian/Provinces/Territories boundaries were imported from GeoBase in 2008 - actually the original contributor just confirmed me.  These imported GeoBase boundaries were, and still being used, for GeoBase products definition - NRN, NHN, ...
		
		I understand that one of the primary objective for StatCan, creating similar boundaries, is to make census field work easier - not necessarily geometrically accurate!  So, their boundaries might be different from GeoBase boundaries - and Osm - because it serves another purpose.
		
		The same applies to many georeferenced StatCan products, like Road Network ...
		
		Regards,
		
		Daniel
		



		-----Original Message-----
		From: talk-ca-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-ca-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Weait
		Sent: 23 juillet 2010 12:37
		To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
		Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Converted Stats Can Boundaries files.
		
		On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Sam Vekemans <acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com> wrote:
		> hi talk-ca,
		> because it is an entire complex web of relations, were 1 way has 2 or
		> more relations attached to it, i'd recomment the solution on the wiki,
		> if we want to preserve the rule that all bountaries need to be
		> relations.
		>
		> then the 1st task is the look at the povince file, and remove the
		> existing boundary data that will cause duplicate ways.
		
		I presume you mean "keep the existing data and don't use the duplicate data from the file."
		
		> then once each province is all clear, then 1 person can upload it all at once.
		
		Come on now, you aren't really suggesting removing existing boundary data just to add it back in, are you?  That doesn't sound very considerate of the previous mappers.
		
		Have you looked at the relative technical merits of the existing boundary data and the StatsCan data Tyler just converted?  Are they from the same source, or is one of provably lower quality?
		
		How about starting with a smaller test than a complete province?
		Would anyone care to take a look at their neigbourhood and the related and adjacent boundaries?
		
		_______________________________________________
		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/20100727/a2130866/attachment.html>