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

[john whelan]

It appears the original discussion on talk-ca was missed by many.

There appears to be an issue of local buy-in but I think for the moment we
should first concentrate on the problems we expect to see.

The building outlines we imported in Ottawa predated the Bing imagery I
suspect.

So first off what should be done with buildings in the import that are not
on ESRI or Bing?  Assuming they are being imported by an armchair mapper.

My suggestion is they be ignored.  Realistically we aren't going to capture
every building in Canada but it should give us a reasonable start.

For buildings that already exist I see two possibilities.  First is do not
import, the second import but copy over the history i.e. merge.

I have no strong feelings either way.

For buildings that are imported my suggestion is they should be tagged
building=yes unless there is local knowledge or mapilary or openstreetcam
imagery to support something different.

Should the import be preprocessed to square the buildings or remove small
blobs?

I hear two points of view, one says it should be the other says bring it in
as it is.

My personal gut feel is bring it in as is.  However I don't have strong
views on this.

I'm hearing the import plan should have more detailed instructions.  I
think some were placed on the task manager.

Have I missed anything?

Can we try for consensus or what I have listed?

I suggest we put aside what is local buy in and how we obtain it for the
moment.

Thanks John

On Sat, Jan 19, 2019, 5:31 PM Begin Daniel <jfd553 at hotmail.com wrote:

> It seems that talk-ca works this way - long periods of silence, then a
> burst of emails because something went wrong! I just realized that this
> massive import of buildings started a few weeks ago and I’m surprised.
>
>
>
> I was trying to stay informed about the project because I was worried
> about how the import would deal with the thousands of buildings I have
> modified (or deleted) over the years.
>
>
>
> I then tend to agree with Steve, Andrew and Nate. Something happened too
> fast or went wrong. There is so much to discuss about how to proceed, how
> to deal with existing buildings, how to deal with buildings that do not
> seem to exist on images, etc. I would have liked to participate in the
> discussion. All of this may have been dealt with the import project of
> Ottawa, however, as this particular project did not interest me, I did not
> follow the discussions. I was expecting the new import project to be
> documented and discussed by itself, even if it eventually ends-up as a copy
> paste of Ottawa import’s procedures.
>
>
>
> Communication and clear statements are required to make such large import
> a success and a buy-in of all the community. I think this is why following
> the import guideline is important.
>
>
>
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190119/3ad3531c/attachment-0001.html>