[Talk-ca] 2020 building import wiki comment by Nate Wessel

[John Whelan]

I agree and we are sensitive to Quebec's position.

I think the hope was we would make the data available and that local 
mappers would be involved in the import over time as happens with 
CANVEC.  One comment I heard early on was this isn't so much an import 
as a marathon.

What seems to have happened is a lot of buildings have been imported 
very quickly.  In rural areas or places where there are few buildings 
this isn't so much of a problem. Certain locations have run in very 
smoothly.

I think the data quality is considerably better than iD and Mapathons 
with new mappers.

The original data files are available on an Open Data portal with a 
license that is compatible with OSM and to be honest we have very little 
control over who can download them or what they do with them.

What we do have is a process that was used in Ottawa and is fairly 
robust. Data quality is very dependent on the individual mappers doing 
the import though.

Looking at the stats I don't think much has been done in Quebec and I 
feel James would be happy to restrict access Quebec in someway if that 
would make you happier for the moment.  It has been set up as a separate 
set of tiles so can be isolated fairly easily.

Could you be nice and chat to the Quebec mappers and sound them out on 
what they would like to do?  The data for Quebec is from Quebec 
municipalities by the way.  Please bear in mind that Microsoft are 
rumoured to be about to release building data for Canada in the same way 
as they have for the US.  This is scanned from images data and I suspect 
the data quality will not be as high as the Municipal data.  I 
understand there are multiple imports going on with the US Microsoft 
building outline data currently.

I seem to recall that Daniel Begin, who I believe is a Quebec mapper, 
made comments on the project in talk-ca some time ago.  I also seem to 
recall it was his suggestion that we made it a single import plan.

Thoughts?

Thanks John

Pierre Béland wrote on 2019-01-18 6:54 PM:
> John,
>
> Il y a local et local. Compte-tenu des différences culturelles Québec 
> vs Canada en général et que les contributeurs du Québec ne fréquentent 
> pratiquement pas cette liste, vous ne devriez pas prendre pour acquis 
> que vous représentez cette communauté et pouvez démarrer des projets 
> en son nom.
>
>
> Pierre
>
>
> Le vendredi 18 janvier 2019 13 h 11 min 37 s HNE, john whelan 
> <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>
> I know of no other way to contact him but he made an interesting 
> comment that the project is on hold in the wiki pending review.
>
> Would he care to comment on who is supposed to be reviewing the project?
>
> My understanding is that the import was raised in talk-ca before it 
> commenced for comment and these were generally favourable.  I took 
> that as the local mappers to Canada had been consulted and they are 
> the "local mappers" authority in this case.
>
> I understand he has concerns about local mappers making decisions but 
> in Canada we have been importing similar data through CANVEC for some 
> time.  CANVEC data comes from a number of sources including municipal 
> data.
>
> Is he suggesting that each of the 3,700 municipalities in Canada 
> should form a group of local mappers who can make individual decisions 
> on whether their municipal data should be imported and we should end 
> up with 3,700 import plans?
>
> Thanks John
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

-- 
Sent from Postbox 
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20190118/483e3c99/attachment-0001.html>