[Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

James james2432 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 23 13:34:09 UTC 2017


1. The bad reverted data will be cleaned in the import process (we know
there is a few patches here and there in Ottawa), but Frammy decided to
give up on the revert

2. They will be moved manually in each tile as we were doing before. They
will be moved to the center of the building and merged down to the outline.
Terracing might take longer. Alignment of points is irrelevant if we are
merging them to the polygon outlines as this creates a new data set that
Ottawa does not have (addresses with the polygons)

3. Yes, city and province per address seems a little excessive and grows
the database quite quickly, when you can do a simple spatial join.

4. There is no way to verify if sheds are still there, unless we trespass
on people's properties. Best example of this is:
https://www.bing.com/maps?FORM=Z9LH3 that huge building has been destroyed
to build a new Costco location, this one here:
https://www.bing.com/maps?FORM=Z9LH3 has been demolished this week for
condominiums. This is where local knowledge is essential. Sheds cannot
really be surveyed, so we rather avoid mapping small sheds that might not
be there.

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Stewart C. Russell <scruss at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 2017-01-23 01:54 AM, Denis Carriere wrote:
> > There's been a lot of discussion on the license, however has anyone read
> > the documentation on the import yet?
>
> Read it? My mucky paw-prints are all over the edit history of the
> article and its talk page. So I know I've read it, at least.
>
> Couple of things:
>
> 1.      There are still some lurking imported data that the previous
>         edits left behind. This could have been due to the reversion
> process
> stopping/failing. An example is the chunk of address nodes around Bank &
> Walkley, such as
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4432919584/history#map=
> 17/45.36977/-75.66044
>
> Is there a decision on what needs to be done to these data?
>
>
> 2.      Does the import process still intend to move (manually?) the
>         address points from the lot centres to the building centroids?
> While
> this gives StatCan their building addresses, it does mean that OSM will
> create its own variant of the Ottawa address file that won't align with
> any other data set.
>
>
> 3.      Just to check: the address nodes will only have the
>         house number, street and (optionally) unit? The city, province and
> country tags are superfluous because of boundary relations. If StatCan
> want this, we should show them how to do a query that pulls in spatial
> relations.
>
>
> 4.      (weak attempt at humour) The decision to filter out
>         outbuildings is, frankly, shedist. A world without huts and
> bothies is
> not one I would wish to live in.
>
>
>  Stewart “Two Sheds” Russell
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20170123/6540f187/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list