[Talk-ca] Using City of Vancouver Open Licensed Data?

keith keithistan at gmail.com
Thu Oct 5 18:28:21 UTC 2017

Thanks for the input. Looking all that info over it seemed appropriate for
me to go forward with a small test import, so I have done so.

While many of the buildings are quite roughly traced, this is similar to
many areas of Vancouver, and I believe that it is a big improvement.

Here is the changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52634089

I've since gone over the area, and cleaned up some of the building traces,
and added some missing garages.

I hope that looks good to everyone, and if there are no issues I will
continue to import bits of the CoV footprint data, in small chunks (similar
to the one I've already done). I will be closely reviewing the data before
import, and ensuring it is free from duplicates, and that it correlates
reasonably well with the imagery.

Thanks All,
Keith (keithonearth)

On 3 October 2017 at 10:44, Alan Richards <alarobric at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is some information on the wiki here. https://wiki.
> openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:British_Columbia:Vancouver#
> GIS_sources_by_city. Special permission was obtained from the city for
> certain datasets only.
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:09 AM, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I understand Paul Norman arranged for something for the city of
>> Vancouver Open Data so the data might be imported into OSM.  This is
>> independent of the normal licensing route.
>> Cheerio John
>> On 2 October 2017 at 14:15, keith <keithistan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello Canada list,
>>> I am interested in using some of the data provided by the City of
>>> Vancouver under the "Open Government Licence – Vancouver" (
>>> http://vancouver.ca/your-government/open-data-catalogue.aspx#tab19099).
>>> According to the OSM wiki this is compatible with OSM's licence (
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Vancouver), is this
>>> accurate?
>>> I want to do small imports of building traces, manually checking the
>>> imagery against the Imagery. I guess this should still be considered to
>>> finish off the section of Vancouver that does not have the buildings
>>> traced. The quality of the data from the City of Vancouver is OK, not
>>> amazing, in fact slightly lower than the average for Vancouver building
>>> traces, but not outside the range. It would be trivial to improve the
>>> traces to be better than average, and I would do so for what I import. It's
>>> for a relatively small area, about 2km by 4.5km, and I would be doing lots
>>> of manual fixes and inspection. So many that I'm not really sure that it's
>>> exactly an import.
>>> If the building traces goes smoothly, and has general acceptance, I
>>> might use other data from the listed datasets.
>>> What do the folks on this list say? Am I good to go ahead with this?
>>> Thanks for any input.
>>> Keith
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20171005/38c545f0/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-ca mailing list