> And we took the decision to use this info
> to spot rapidly the populated areas. «Take time» to look at these
> polygons one by one (we did) and you will see that they reflect
> adequately the density of housing in these areas.
No, they don't (at least not for any meaningful definition of
On Thursday 16 August 2018, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> In a way, it's what we did in Western Europe when we only had Landsat
> imagery: "Uh, this looks like a settlement, let's draw a grey blob"
Absolutely not.
The settlement structure of Western Europe can be pretty accurately
mapped from
Claire who added these polygons is a resident of DR Congo. She coordinated
with me the North-Kivu OSM Response in 2012, coordinating with the UN agencies
and NGO's in Kinshasa. She is coordinator of OSM-DRC and coordinator of this
OSM Response for the Ebola outbreak around Beni, working
Hi,
On 16.08.2018 09:56, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61401087
Btw I have commented on this changeset. Apparently the main use case is
having a general indication of "there are people living here".
In a way, it's what we did in Western Europe when we only
On 16/08/2018 12:35, Rory McCann wrote:
What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight up
import of the original building geometries would probably be (i) less
contentious (since a building is a building is a
On Thursday 16 August 2018, Rory McCann wrote:
> What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
> comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight
> up import of the original building geometries would probably be (i)
> less contentious (since a building is a
What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight up
import of the original building geometries would probably be (i) less
contentious (since a building is a building is a building), and (ii)
more accurate for
On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:
>
> Satellite imagery is available for the world..
> But how much do you know of Africa?
> [...]
You maybe don't realize that but the kind of data garbage i pointed to
is the direct result of projecting ideas and experiences of settlement
structures of
On 16/08/18 19:26, Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:
As that particular mapper has local knowledge on their side I'd not
challenge them.
Why not?
I would love to see some ground level or aerial/satellite images
documenting the verifiability of those outlines.
On Thursday 16 August 2018, Warin wrote:
>
> As that particular mapper has local knowledge on their side I'd not
> challenge them.
Why not?
I would love to see some ground level or aerial/satellite images
documenting the verifiability of those outlines.
The good thing about verifiability and
On 16/08/18 17:56, Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Thursday 16 August 2018, john whelan wrote:
Could this be used to detect villages and towns which have not yet
been mapped.
If something could drop some sort of marker where it thinks a cluster
of buildings are then we could use overpass to pull
On Thursday 16 August 2018, john whelan wrote:
> Could this be used to detect villages and towns which have not yet
> been mapped.
>
> If something could drop some sort of marker where it thinks a cluster
> of buildings are then we could use overpass to pull them into JOSM
> and map them as
Could this be used to detect villages and towns which have not yet been
mapped.
If something could drop some sort of marker where it thinks a cluster of
buildings are then we could use overpass to pull them into JOSM and map
them as places, landuse=residential, village or whatever.
Thoughts?
13 matches
Mail list logo
