[Talk-ca] broken forests in eastern Canada

Adam Martin s.adam.martin at gmail.com
Tue Aug 30 23:14:38 UTC 2016


I've contacted him as well. Here's what I sent:

Good day, Nakaner

I am a resident of Canada and a contributor to OSM here. Looking over your
profile, you have over 5,500 edits across the OSM project, making you a
skilled mapper. It has come to the attention of the Canadian OSM community
recently that you have been performing work here and we appreciate that.
However, it has also come to our attention that much of the work you are
doing involves reverting the CANVEC data imports that we use here without
consultation with the local OSM group.

As you know, mapping is an involved process, especially in a country as
large geographically as Canada. Our population is relatively low, which
results in large expanses of land being effectively free of human
involvement. Since mapping effort tend to centre around human activity,
this means that large parts of Canada can go unmapped for a long time. To
combat this, we have made use of the CANVEC data graciously made available
by the Federal Government through the Department of Natural Resources. This
information covers most of the country in its surveys. It is known to be
somewhat inaccurate, but in the absence of information in a given area, it
is definitely welcome.

Most of the imports that you are flagging for revision have been in place
for years; in some cases, even before the policy for importation was in
place. I'm sure that they didn't always meet the guidelines that are now in
place within the larger OSM community, but the fact remains that the
information that they represent is invaluable to the Canadian portion of
the map and the mappers here.

If you wish to have that data become higher in quality, you are on the same
side as the Canadian mapping community. We know the limitations of CANVEC
and are working to allieviate them. Come join our OSM talk list and discuss
your concerns with us. We are very welcoming to any points of view on the
map. This allows all of us to come to a mutual understanding and solution
to the problems with the imported data that you highlight.

Our list is talk-ca at openstreetmap.org

Thanks,

Adam

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 8:09 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:

> But Daniel's comments make sense, I'm not sure we should go for this type
> of approach.
>
> Still I concur with them.  On the forests there is an issue but its not
> open to a simplistic approach and hence difficult to resolve.
>
> John
>
> On 30 August 2016 at 18:28, James <james2432 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm totally in agreement with Daniel, especially that it creates a
>> hostile community
>>
>> On Aug 30, 2016 6:05 PM, "Pierre Béland" <pierzenh at yahoo.fr> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> J'invite les autres contributeurs canadiens à indiquer leur accord avec
>>> le message de Daniel. :)
>>>
>>> I invite other canadian OSM contributors to express their agreement with
>>> Daniel message. :)
>>>
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *De :* Begin Daniel <jfd553 at hotmail.com>
>>> *À :* James <james2432 at gmail.com>; Adam Martin <s.adam.martin at gmail.com>
>>>
>>> *Cc :* Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
>>> *Envoyé le :* mardi 30 août 2016 17h35
>>> *Objet :* Re: [Talk-ca] broken forests in eastern Canada
>>>
>>> I have contacted the user that is about/has deleted some changesets
>>> imported from Canvec. I may agree on some of his comments but totally
>>> disagree on the method he is using to make his point.
>>>
>>> I do not know what the DWG will do about this guy but here is the
>>> message I sent him...
>>> Bonjour Nakaner, I understand that you wish the data in OSM being
>>> accurate, well-structured and made according to the rules developed by the
>>> OSM community. However, I would strongly suggest that you discuss your
>>> point with the Canadian community before deleting any changesets.
>>>
>>> Canvec imports are running for more than 6 years and the structure of
>>> the data was discussed with the Canadian OSM community, including OSMF
>>> members, for more than a year. The result is a compromise that used to suit
>>> most members. The rules you are mentioning in the comments you leave where
>>> not even written at that time.
>>>
>>> Most Canadian importers simply keep doing what they used to do years
>>> ago. If you consider they should not, have a discussion with the whole
>>> Canadian community. You will then be able to make your point, make everyone
>>> aware of these rules and understand your concerns.
>>>
>>> You will then be able to build a stronger community, not discourage
>>> people to contribute because they have made errors...
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> *From:* James [mailto:james2432 at gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, 30 August, 2016 09:18
>>> *To:* Adam Martin
>>> *Cc:* Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] broken forests in eastern Canada
>>>
>>> He's even going to revert my work:
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41776742
>>> I've forwarded this to the DWG, it's getting rediculous.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Martin <s.adam.martin at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> That's a pretty harsh thing to deal with. Imports are difficult and the
>>> time needed to get them right is not a small investment. To have someone
>>> review this work is a valuable service, but I don't think just blanket
>>> reverting due to the violation of one rule is the solution, especially in
>>> context of the lack of data in some of those areas. The CANVEC stuff will
>>> do until surveys or satellite data catches up with those areas.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:35 AM, John Marshall <rps333 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> Andrew, I hear you! I have been trying to add data around unmapped
>>> Northern Communities around James Bay and Nunavut. But after someone revert
>>> some of my work I'm stopping:(
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160830/a9cc0469/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list