[Talk-ca] Qualiuty of OSM data

[Adam Martin]

I would also like to take a read through that document. Sounds interesting.

CANVEC has been good for the Canadian mapping efforts, but it is stale data
and not highly accurate. Yet it provides us a base to work from and has the
benefit of filling the map with ... something. A giant blank gap for Canada
would not be very good for the map in general and us specifically.

On Aug 31, 2016 7:38 PM, "James" <james2432 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've read it in the past, I do agree cavec is not 100% accurate, but  in
> areas with absolutely nothing, it is better than a blank map: which is
> useless.
>
> On Aug 31, 2016 6:02 PM, "dega" <gadelap at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi everybody!
> On 2016-08-31 Stewart C. Russell wrote:
> > A paper published in the last couple of years (by Anita Graser, maybe?)
> > showed that CanVec imports were the largest source of spurious precision
> > in the entire OSM database.
>
> If somebody has a link to that document, I would like to get it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> dega
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160831/8a5de853/attachment.html>