[talk-ph] Coastlines - was Forest landcover

[David Groom]

Eugene

the coastline ways which I am improving seem to derive from an import of 
IFSAR 2012 data (See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33871982)


So these are after the 2010 mini project to improve the coaastline

David


>As for the saw-tooth coastlines, I'm actually surprised they still
>exist to a large degree since we did a mini-project back in 2010 to
>improve those coastlines:
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/Coastline_corrections
>
>~Eugene

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Coastlines - was Forest landcover

[maning sambale]

Hi David,

I saw a similar ifsar/insar import over Baybay City, which I removed
since it overlapped with existing coastline and riverbank polygons
traced in Bing. I'm curious who did this but I did not followed up
with the concerned mapper.  From what I remembered, PH gov acquired
ifsar data over Leyte after Typhoon Haiyan. I'm quite sure that the PH
gov did not give any permission to import them to OSM or its
derivatives. In addition, ifsar vectors were derived from hires raster
(~20m), so the staircase will be in a similar length.

Might be good to probe more.  Can you give me sample changesets so I
can ask around.

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 5:48 PM, David Groom  wrote:
> Eugene
>
> the coastline ways which I am improving seem to derive from an import of
> IFSAR 2012 data (See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33871982)
>
> So these are after the 2010 mini project to improve the coaastline
>
> David
>
>
>>As for the saw-tooth coastlines, I'm actually surprised they still
>>exist to a large degree since we did a mini-project back in 2010 to
>>improve those coastlines:
>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/Coastline_corrections
>>
>>~Eugene
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph



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

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Forest landcover

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

I agree. I actually admire the detailed landcover areas found in many
places in Europe in OSM and I can't see how such a level of detail
would be problematic here in the Philippines.

As for the saw-tooth coastlines, I'm actually surprised they still
exist to a large degree since we did a mini-project back in 2010 to
improve those coastlines:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/Coastline_corrections

~Eugene

On 2/4/16, Ronny Ager-Wick  wrote:
> I'm not an authority on this, but I can't see a reason why not. The current
> lines are unlikely to be accurate the way you describe them and matches what
> I've seen elsewhere in the Philippines.
> Ronny.
>
> On 2016-02-02 18:17, David Groom wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Firstly let me introduce myself, I'm based in the UK.  I've been involed
>> with
>> OSM pretty much from the start, (I attended the first ever mapping party),
>> was
>> responsible for a large part of the original worldwide coastline import,
>> spent a lot of time fixing coastline errors, did most of the original
>> mapping
>> of Baghdad from Bing & Yahoo imagery, and have done of lot of other mappng
>> from imagery worldwide, as well as mapping from my own GPX tracks here in
>> th
>> UK and wherever I vacation.
>>
>> I have recently started mapping parts of Leyte. Initially focusing on some
>> of
>> the smaller scale mapping ( tracing builings etc) .
>>
>> I then noticed that some areas of coastline on the west of the island
>> needed
>> updating from imagery since it had the typical "saw-tooth" effect
>> resulting
>> from imports of coastline data. so have been working on that.  I'm not
>> finished yet!
>>
>> Anyway, the purpose of my post to the list is to ask about landuse =
>> forest
>> areas.  If you look at the central part of Leyte some large areas have
>> been
>> mapped and tagged for the forest, but :
>>
>> (1) these seem to have arbitary boundaries (long strainght lines where the
>> areas simply have not been accuarely mapped to any natural feature)
>>
>> (2) The areas so far mapped with tree cover (either "natural = wood", or
>> "landuse = forest" represent a smnall proportion of the actual forest
>> cover on
>> the island.
>>
>> My question is, is it OK if as I map other things I extend the tree cover
>> areas .  This may result in a large part of Leyte "turning green" on the
>> map.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> David Groom
>>
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Forest landcover

[Leonard Soriano]

Hi, 

I think it is OK to extend the tree cover areas if the basis of mapping is the 
present forest land cover. The mapped areas would be actually close to what is 
existing on the ground.

On a related note. I just observed that some mapped ares of existing land use = 
forest, were based on elevation data rather than the actual extent of the 
forest cover.  Although there is a relationship between the type of vegetation 
that can be present in a given elevation range, I think it is not always 
automatic that the area of the forest cover boundary would follow the line 
boundary of a specific elevation.  

--bunny


On Thursday, 4 February 2016, 19:33, Eugene Alvin Villar  
wrote:
 

 I agree. I actually admire the detailed landcover areas found in many
places in Europe in OSM and I can't see how such a level of detail
would be problematic here in the Philippines.

As for the saw-tooth coastlines, I'm actually surprised they still
exist to a large degree since we did a mini-project back in 2010 to
improve those coastlines:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/Coastline_corrections

~Eugene

On 2/4/16, Ronny Ager-Wick  wrote:
> I'm not an authority on this, but I can't see a reason why not. The current
> lines are unlikely to be accurate the way you describe them and matches what
> I've seen elsewhere in the Philippines.
> Ronny.
>
> On 2016-02-02 18:17, David Groom wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Firstly let me introduce myself, I'm based in the UK.  I've been involed
>> with
>> OSM pretty much from the start, (I attended the first ever mapping party),
>> was
>> responsible for a large part of the original worldwide coastline import,
>> spent a lot of time fixing coastline errors, did most of the original
>> mapping
>> of Baghdad from Bing & Yahoo imagery, and have done of lot of other mappng
>> from imagery worldwide, as well as mapping from my own GPX tracks here in
>> th
>> UK and wherever I vacation.
>>
>> I have recently started mapping parts of Leyte. Initially focusing on some
>> of
>> the smaller scale mapping ( tracing builings etc) .
>>
>> I then noticed that some areas of coastline on the west of the island
>> needed
>> updating from imagery since it had the typical "saw-tooth" effect
>> resulting
>> from imports of coastline data. so have been working on that.  I'm not
>> finished yet!
>>
>> Anyway, the purpose of my post to the list is to ask about landuse =
>> forest
>> areas.  If you look at the central part of Leyte some large areas have
>> been
>> mapped and tagged for the forest, but :
>>
>> (1) these seem to have arbitary boundaries (long strainght lines where the
>> areas simply have not been accuarely mapped to any natural feature)
>>
>> (2) The areas so far mapped with tree cover (either "natural = wood", or
>> "landuse = forest" represent a smnall proportion of the actual forest
>> cover on
>> the island.
>>
>> My question is, is it OK if as I map other things I extend the tree cover
>> areas .  This may result in a large part of Leyte "turning green" on the
>> map.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> David Groom
>>
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph


  ___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[talk-ph] Fwd: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM 289

[maning sambale]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Jinal Foflia 
Date: Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:20 AM
Subject: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM 289
To: t...@openstreetmap.org


The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue #289 is now available online in
English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the
OpenStreetMap world:

  http://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/6789

Highlights of the weekly

Wikimedia Italia is now official Chapter of OpenStreetMap ...
Interested in Crowdsourcing Data and Quality Control, lookin for
information related to this webinar ...
Do you want hear a map talk to you? ...
Worried about the privacy related to the location you are sharing?
Lookin for the App Location Privacy ...
HOT is searching for a web-developer to build and OSM Data Quality
Analysis Tool, look in for more information ...

weeklyOSM is brought to you by ... https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM

Regards,

Jinal Foflia


___
talk mailing list
t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



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

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Coastlines - was Forest landcover

[David Groom]

>Might be good to probe more.  Can you give me sample changesets so I
>can ask around.

As far as I can see its https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33871982


___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph