[Talk-us] UVM-SAL Buildings

William Morris wboykinm at geosprocket.com
Fri Jun 1 17:53:51 BST 2012


Fantastic. I'll give the plugin a run, along with some de-noding (is
orthogonalization worthwhile in this case?), and check back with folks. And
here's the pre-filtered buildings file county-wide (in .shp format still):

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/mont_bld_large.zip

Thanks!

-B



On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Josh Doe wrote:

> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 9:25 PM, William Morris
> <wboykinm at geosprocket.com> wrote:
> > Howdy Folks,
> >
> > Trying this again, after a hiatus, here is a sample of a few hundred
> > buildings from a UVM-SAL land use classification. In this case it's
> > for an area just west of D.C. in Montgomery County, MD. I offer it for
> > your consideration before I pull the import trigger:
> >
> > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/mont_b_1.osm
>
> Thanks for sharing. Spatial accuracy is pretty good for an automated
> process (worst I saw was 5m, usually more like 1 to 2m), though not as
> good as could be done (very laboriously) by hand given the resolution
> of the Bing imagery. I'd tend to say this shouldn't be uploaded en
> masse, but rather somewhat selectively, but I'll let the locals make
> that call.
>
> There a few issues I see which include:
> * Multipolygons aren't tagged with type=multipolygon, and the
> building=yes tags should be on the relation, not on the constituent
> (inner and outer) ways
> * AREA and PERIMETER should not be included as they can be calculated,
> and LandCover should not be included unless you can map it to a
> sensible (preferably already in use) tag, and since it's all 5 I'm
> guessing that's taken care of by building=yes
> * Ways are overnoded quite a bit, so run Douglas-Peucker first,
> experimenting with epsilon between 1m and 2m
>
> I've been slowly making improvements to the JOSM conflation plugin,
> with one goal being to facilitate the conflation of data like this
> with OSM. If you could provide a version of this file before excluding
> features which overlap existing OSM features, I'd like to try it out
> with the plugin to see if it produces useful results. Even better
> would be if you could take a look at the plugin yourself and suggest
> what enhancements would make it work for this use case. Note there are
> a few changes that aren't in the latest JAR available through JOSM.
>
> -Josh
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20120601/47f6c1e6/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list