[Talk-ca] Canvec source tags

[john whelan]

If I have my OSM hat on there is no issue, one accepts that because of the
large number of users and varying experience levels that not everything
will be correctly tagged or even entered but one hopes that over time on
average the map will be refined to a better state.

With my taxpayer hat on then I'd much prefer to see the map data retain its
CANVEC tags, at least I can see my tax dollars in action.

With my end user of the data hat on I'm more likely to trust the accuracy
of roads that come from CANVEC than those drawn in from satellite imagery.
Actually I trust Bing derived roads and footpaths as well.  So tags saying
CANVEC or Bing are helpful to give an indication of trustworthiness.  Yes I
know they don't show on the web tiles but I'm not the only person who uses
JOSM with a local copy of the data to extract more information from the map
such as web site tags etc.

It all depends on the requirements and one of the problems for Indian
Affairs is there are 500,000 Indians all with different ideas and no
consensus on requirements, I think there are now 500,000 people who have
contributed to OSM and I don't think there is any consensus on what we are
trying to do.  I wonder if 500,000 is some magic number.

I think CANVEC has made a huge contribution to OSM in Canada, compared to
the UK for example I looked up one of my old friends living near Leeds.
There was a main road that ran quite close but practically no residential
roads in the area.

I think we can simply agree to disagree for the moment.

Cheerio John


On 19 December 2011 16:46, Frank Steggink <steggink at steggink.org> wrote:

> On 19-12-2011 22:40, Frank Steggink wrote:
>
>> On 19-12-2011 22:20, john whelan wrote:
>>
>>> But recently I noted that the CANVEC tags are being removed.  Two people
>>> in the talk-ca list mentioned recently they had done so.
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>> According to my mailbox the answers were different. Jonathan mentioned
>> that he used other data sources, so the data wasn't significantly Canvec
>> anymore. Gordon didn't mention he removed tags, he just offered a possible
>> reason. As to your question in that thread, and not knowing the user you
>> were referring to, I was just wondering whether you sent him/her a PM and
>> asked about the reason (but I didn't bother to post that to the mailing
>> list). So, did you ask that user directly?
>>
>> Also Bing has stated that they should be attributed. That is one of the
>> conditions they provided their imagery to OSM. Of course everyone knows
>> that the source tags aren't absolute guarantees. It is also not practical
>> to enforce them. If that would happen, OSM would not develop as it does
>> right now, so although I would oppose removing source tags knowingly (when
>> the data is not altered significantly), there are many shades of grey. It
>> is often hard to draw a boundary, so we have to rely on the good intentions
>> of the mappers. That makes a project like OSM both challenging and charming
>> :)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Frank
>>
>>  John,
>
> I've got a question for you. I'm planning to (finally) clean up the
> forests / residential areas in Quebec City for some time. [1] I'll probably
> do this around Christmas. For this task I'll rely on the Bing imagery. How
> should I tag the polygons I create / modify? Should I leave "Canvec" intact
> as a source, use "Bing", or should I cut up the polygons in two? The only
> difference between the new parts will be the attribution.
>
> I usually use a mixed tag in such cases (like source=Canvec;Bing). But
> since OSM has many users, many which are not experienced and/or do not care
> about these issues, can you realistically expect that everyone will take
> care about attribution properly?
>
> Regards,
>
> Frank
>
> [1] http://osm.org/go/cKZOMVgi-
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ca<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20111219/a5532ce4/attachment.html>