[Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

[Frank Steggink]

Hi Paul,

It probably won't come to you as a surprise if I would say it is 
acceptable, but to a certain degree. A map with no data is not a map. A 
map with inconsistent data is still a map, but obviously something is 
not right. A map with perfectly consistent data doesn't need to tell the 
truth either. Remember the fantasy city someone added about a month ago? 
Furthermore, a map can become outdated. This is also true for OSM.

Anyways, the reason I've been importing Canvec data is to provide more 
coverage, so others can work with it. OSM is a community project, and I 
think everyone has a share in it. This is one of the main reasons I 
started with OSM, because I believe in the ideals and goals. To you it 
might sound that importers like me are leaving a "big mess" behind for 
others to deal with. To me, it was a choice. The alternative would be 
either no data, or very sparse and incomplete data. It would take ages 
to "complete" the map, since there are not nearly as much mappers in 
Canada as there are in Germany. A map which is only half complete 
doesn't have half the value of a complete map, but way less. That's also 
the reason I imported forests in suburban areas. It can still be cleaned 
up later. Leaving the forest out of it leaves an ugly gap, and fixing it 
during the import is so time consuming the import would go on endlessly 
(which it does already...).

Also, many or most people who are mapping with OSM do not have a mapping 
or geospatial background. Let me be clear, I think it is wonderful that 
they join OSM and step upon the learning curve to become a contributor. 
On the other hand, in many cases the quality of their contributions are 
not that great. I also don't like the fact that something is abandoned 
half-way (like the Canvec import). So the choice I made was to provide 
them and the rest of the community with some kind of baseline. With the 
Canvec data imported, it makes it easier for people to add POI's and 
other stuff. And while importing, I also fixed other errors which 
existed in the maps. Of course not all of them, but what would be 
reasonably possible from my armchair. Furthermore, the imports I've done 
about half a year ago were aimed at filling gaps between existing 
imports. It is a pretty daunting task, so it is no surprise many have 
stopped, and I just wanted to get the job done.

However, time is limited, so I eventually decided to stop. The reasons 
which motivated me doing imports are no longer enough to continue. It is 
partially due to the criticism of you and others. If my contributions 
are not accepted / acceptable, there is no reason to continue, so I can 
better stop. I also think that OSM has caused a lot of awareness for 
open data, and governments are opening up much more. For example, also 
in the Netherlands a lot of datasets have become open data, like the 
national road register, buildings, and topography. Of course, with the 
availability of Canvec, this is also true in Canada. So for many 
geospatial professionals there is not much reason to continue OSM, 
except when you're interested in areas for which no other alternative 
exists (cycling routes, historic buildings, etc.).

Frank

On 10-11-2012 12:37, Paul Norman wrote:
> CanVec data comes from multiple sources and this can lead to internal
> inconsistencies. A common case is a new development where there used to be
> trees. The tree data in CanVec might be older and show an area as forested
> while there is newer road data indicating that the area has been developed.
> An example of this type is
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.695&lon=-73.905&zoom=17 although I have
> seen many other cases of it.
>
> Another common case is the trees in water problem frequently found in BC. A
> typical example is
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.648&lon=-123.911&zoom=17 where there is
> a conflict between the water data and the forest data. You need to view the
> data as it doesn't show up on the rendering.
>
> Is it the communities view that it is okay to import CanVec without
> reconciling the internal differences between the layers?
>
> My view is that importing data without resolving conflicts of this type
> where it conflicts with either existing data or internally is not an
> acceptable import and indicates the importer did not sufficiently review
> what they were uploading.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>