[Talk-us] Updates:LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

[maning sambale]

Hi,

Over the past month, since we started the LA building import [0],
~330K buildings were added by 74 different users [1]. We ran several
mapathon events [2] in LA to kickstart the import with local mappers.

As this has been going on we've been validating the work, and fixing
any data quality issues we've encountered. If you have specific concerns,
please post in the repo [3].

The OSM Operations group has asked that we pause on all large mapping
import activities for the next two weeks as they prepare for the
upcoming
server move. Since we are adding thousands of nodes for each changeset,
this is slowing down the backup process.

We will update the list once we get the green light again. [4]

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Los_angeles,_California/Buildings_Import
[1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/lacounty:ain#overview
[2] http://www.meetup.com/MaptimeLA/
[3] https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues
[4] https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues/88

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 8:48 PM, maning sambale
<emmanuel.sambale at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We've started the import this during MaptimeLA [0] last April 2.
> First project focused on Southside LA [1].
> For any issues regarding the process and the data please post a ticket
> in GH [2].
>
> [0] http://www.meetup.com/MaptimeLA/events/229861154/
> [1] http://labuildingsimport.com/project/2
> [2] https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Christoph Hormann
> <chris_hormann at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On Thursday 24 March 2016, maning sambale wrote:
>>>
>>> > - Tagging still looks vague.  What you have on
>>> > https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/blob/master/README.md is just
>>> > a list of OSM keys to use but there is no information on the values
>>> > -
>>>
>>> Right, I updated the wiki to describe the tags.  Still a work in
>>> progress, but see here:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Los_angeles,_California/Buildings
>>>_Import#Data_Preparation
>>
>> Thanks, this clarifies things a lot and mostly looks good.
>>
>> Regarding tagging plans please consider that building=farm is
>> exclusively for residential building on a farm, not for other buildings
>> with farming related use.
>>
>>> The initial offset we saw was due to re-projection issues from NAD83
>>> to WGS84 datum.  By using a custom projection parameters the
>>> difference is very minimal difference (10 micrometer precision
>>> range). Reprojection is now step is now added in the wiki.
>>
>> OK. I was also concerned about vertical datum (i.e. reference geoid) for
>> elevation values and feet vs. meters for ele and height.
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>
>
>
> --
> cheers,
> maning
> ------------------------------------------------------
> "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
> https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
> http://twitter.com/maningsambale
> ------------------------------------------------------



-- 
cheers,
maning
------------------------------------------------------
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
http://twitter.com/maningsambale
------------------------------------------------------