[Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

[Daniel Begin]

Paul, I understand Bryan's point of view. In a former life I had to ask map
users if they were preferring map consistency with old data or map
inconsistency with an updated road network. They mostly preferred the last
option
If we go on your proposal, one could upload an entire map sheet except where
there is some inconsistencies. These inconsistencies will usually be in
sub-urban area. It is easy to clean the data if good Bing imagery is
available but what if not? The rural area will be filled with data and
sub-urban area will be kept blank? I'm not sure I would like it...

What other contributors would like to see?

--------
Paul, Je comprends le point de vue de Bryan. Dans une autre vie, J'ai eu à
demander à des usagers s'il préféraient une carte consistante mais périmée
ou inconsistante mais avec un réseau routier à jour. Ils ont préférés la
dernière option.
Si nous allons sur ta proposition, on pourraient charger une carte complète
sauf là ou il y a des inconsistances. Ces inconsistances seront généralement
en banlieue. C'est facile de corriger les données si les images Bing sont de
qualité mais que faire si elles ne le sont pas? Les secteurs ruraux seront
chargés (données complètes) mais les banlieues demeureront vides? Je ne suis
pas certain d'aimer ça...

Qu'est-ce que les autres contributeurs aimeraient voir?


Regards,
Daniel



-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Norman [mailto:penorman at mac.com] 
Sent: November-10-12 19:28
To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

> From: Bryan Crosby [mailto:azubryan at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 8:33 AM
> To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

> This will be my first and only response to this.  If the Canadian OSM
> community feels we need to check every stream, island, oxbow lake, piece
> of 'forest', esker, soil type, muskeg, swamp for accuracy, so be it.
> Keep in mind that in doing so, 80% of the country will receive no data,
> and the community will be down one mapper.

If you don't want to engage in a discussion that is of course up to you.

You appear to be mixing accuracy with consistency. My message was only about
consistency.

Accuracy is about if something is right. Consistency is about if something
makes sense.

Accuracy problems with CanVec are normally limited to old data and the
limits of resolution.

Consistency problems vary more. Generally they're caused because CanVec is
generated from multiple data sets gathered independently without reference
to each other. I had many examples locally of water data indicating a stream
with more recent data indicating the area had been built over. I've fixed
what I've found locally so I don't have any of those examples, but
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.695&lon=-73.905&zoom=17 is a good
example from Quebec of the type of result. You don't need to look at Bing to
see that there's something odd there.


_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca