[Talk-ca] Question on CANVEC

[Harald Kliems]

Just to clarify, I was only talking specifically about the landuse data.
Much of Canvec is great!

Harald.
On Jul 22, 2014 10:21 AM, "Andrew" <andrew.allison at teksavvy.com> wrote:

>         I agree, that the large polygons, are a pain. I would second the
> idea
> of deleting and recreating the wooded areas from imagery. I don't think
> I would go so far to say all of the canvec imported data is bad. i.e.
> Lakes, rivers, roads, address data, train tracks, etc.
>
>         I must from the camp where the goal is to "improve the quality of
> the
> map even if it is from an incremental point. (i.e. no data to some data)
> or I guess (no data to PIA data? :-)
>
>
> Andrew
> aka CanvecImports.
> aka I guess, one of the "offenders" :-)
>
>
> On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 09:25 -0500, Harald Kliems wrote:
> > Just delete and recreate. There have been several discussions on this
> > list about the data quality of the landuse data and if it should've
> > been imported in the first place (no data vs. bad data). Working with
> > gigantic multipolygons is indeed a pain and I don't think there is any
> > value to preserving the import data.
> >
> >
> > Just my two cents,
> >  Harald.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Adam Martin <s.adam.martin at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >         Hey all,
> >
> >
> >         I have a quick question on data that has been imported from
> >         CANVEC. I have been doing some work on the North-West side of
> >         Thunder Bay in Ontario. Part of that has been attempting to
> >         revamp the land use designations there. At the moment, the use
> >         has been entered via CANVEC import, but a review comparing
> >         that data to the actual land underneath from the Satellite
> >         shows fairly large variances. As well, the "Wood" polygon
> >         itself is oddly shaped, with squared lines denoting where it
> >         two CANVEC products were imported side by side.
> >
> >
> >         Large multi-polygon areas like these are impossible to edit in
> >         ID and still difficult in JOSM. So my question is this - if I
> >         am editing the area, what is the perception on deleting the
> >         main "Wood" polygon altogether and re-creating it? My intent
> >         would be to increase the accuracy of the map in the area based
> >         on the satellite data provided by Bing and this would be
> >         easier if the land use were cleared and re-built. I would
> >         leave the features that CANVEC imported - only the land use
> >         would be re-constructed in that case. The other components
> >         would simply be moved and edited as needed.
> >
> >
> >         Thanks,
> >
> >
> >         Adam
> >
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         Talk-ca mailing list
> >         Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> >         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Please use encrypted communication whenever possible!
> > Key-ID: 0x34cb93972f186565
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ca mailing list
> > Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20140722/5751918c/attachment.html>