[OSM-talk] Can Google use our buildings
davefox at madasafish.com
Mon Jan 7 01:28:05 GMT 2013
I understand what & why you're saying this, Nathan, but remember these
images are all, relatively, out of date. I would rather that gaps were
left to be filled with what's is actually on the ground rather than what
was there a few years ago.
I take pride that my city has newest buildings & roads mapped in OSM
before *any* other mapping service. (I'm still getting around to adding
the old, been there for centuries, houses)
Having all areas filled with polygons of buildings doesn't actually
encourage users to refill it with up to date data. More often than not,
they think because *some* data is mapped it must be correct & go & map
Personally I'd rather have (slightly) less, but more accurate data than
blanket inaccurate data. When I first started ('09) I thought the opposite.
On 07/01/2013 00:50, Nathan Mixter wrote:
> I'm not sure if this link has been posted before, but for those
> wondering how Google got their new buildings, there is a link at PC
> Magazine http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411232,00.asp.
> Apparently they recently uploaded 25M buildings done through an
> automated image recognition software.
> I've manually added most of the buildings in the city of Gilroy
> (http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/?lon=-121.56369&lat=37.00553&zoom=17) so
> I was curious to find out where they got their data from. I thought
> maybe the city or county had a secret source that I hadn't found. And
> I checked everywhere I could to find buildings that could have been
> I was wondering if OSM could do the same thing. Could we buy as a
> group a program like Feature Analyst, eCognition or Imagine Objective
> and add buildings that way? We could combine the buildings with any
> existing address points available. I checked into it earlier this year
> and one program was about $2,000. But the money could be quickly
> raised. I know I would be willing to donate.
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk