We did an imperfect import of building footprints in Washington D.C. a while ago. I personally find it makes the map far more usable for adding other information. With the buildings in I am able to add stores and other details easily without using a GPS, simply by printing Walking Papers.
Personally for me I enjoy outlining buildings, but there are plenty of other places without footprints where I could do that if I had the urge. -Kate On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:46 AM, William Morris > <wboyk...@geosprocket.com> wrote: >> So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license upgrade: >> >> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/umd_subset.osm >> >> That's an extract of the UVM-SAL building footprints I'd like to >> import for swathes of MD and PA. My workflow for killing existing >> feature conflicts actually went best without involving ESRI at all: >> >> 1.) In QGIS, Set up 0.2-degree import grid over new building coverage areas >> 2.) Pull down one grid cell worth of OSM data using the QGIS OSM plugin >> 3.) Add building footprint .shp, select all footprints that intersect >> OSM lines or polygons >> 4.) Switch selection, save as new .shp >> 5.) Run ogr2osm.py on new .shp (Special thanks to Andrew Guertin for >> running me through that process) >> 6.) Open new .osm file in JOSM, add building tags, upload. >> 7.) Repeat for next import grid cell >> >> Tedious, but it'll get the job done. And a reminder: I do not intend >> to add any building footprint that conflicts with an existing feature, >> adhering to the OSM preference for user-added features over imports. >> Now soliciting thoughts, roadblocks, expressions of ennui, etc. >> Thanks! >> >> -Bill Morris > > My objection is a generic one and one that has been heard before on > this channel. To be clear, I do not wish to criticise Bill; he > appears to be following the bulk edit guidelines and he is engaging in > the discussions here. That's fantastic. Bill, welcome to the > community. > > I think imports (taking a large number of objects from an external > source and placing them in OSM all at once) is bad for the community. > Most of you have heard me say this before. I still have no hard > evidence to prove it. There is also no hard counter-evidence. At > best, imported data will be unmaintained. I glibly offer most TIGER > ways as evidence. > > I ask you to suspend disbelief for a moment, and presume that imports > are generally bad, and presume that adding new mappers is generally > good. > > Can we try something new? Can we use this building data as motivation > to get new mappers in those areas so that specific mappers will have a > stronger connection to the data in specific areas? > > Something like this: > - Let's set a smaller grid. Something like a large suburban arterial > block, say 1.5km / 1 mi square. > - If you want to import the buildings in one grid square, you have to > find a new mapper in that area, and they have to do an on the ground > survey of some part of that area. > - You can only do so in areas that are no more than four grid squares > from your home location (or work location). > > This is a cross between "adding game-features to OSM", "banning > imports" and "having users adopt part of the map". :-) > > This could be really beneficial to a new mapper. They could survey > the local fire station, police station, hospital and schools, and > perhaps the businesses on the main street, and a few local shopping > malls. They get all of those business names, and they'll be > completely up to date. They'll add them to the map, and they don't > have to trace as many building outlines, because they have the > external source available. > > What I hope this will encourage is: > - new mappers in those areas > - who will do new foot surveys of interesting things > - and will feel attached to the data > - and keep it up to date over time. > > And, if the new mapper understands that the building data for their > area is a "reward", they are unlikely to be frustrated or discouraged > by it if some buildings end up in the wrong place. the new mapper > will just fix them. And carry on mapping. > > I know that what I suggest is much harder than simply importing the > data from one or two accounts. I suggest that the benefit of finding > and encouraging new mappers in your area is much greater than just > having new building outlines in your area. > > Now the Negative Army will jump in and say, "That's too hard.", "That > will never work.", "I want buildings now." > > You can take leadership on this. Are you the only active mapper in > your city or region, or one of only a few? Do this. Be a leader. > Grow the community and then you won't be able to keep up with the > growth of the map. Build new contributors. (And host local OSM > groups.) > > Thanks for letting me hijack your thread, Bill. :-) > > Best regards, > Richard. > > _______________________________________________ > Imports mailing list > impo...@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
