I strongly agree that a locally sourced dataset with more tags would be
preferred in osm. Adding just building outlines complicates future imports
which might be higher quality. If you want help acquiring a better dataset,
asking on this list or a list dedicated to the specific region would be a
good start.

I'm generally opposed to adding source tags on elements. I believe it only
adds clutter and that information should be available on the changeset.

-Alex

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 5:59 AM Joe <[email protected]> wrote:

> My plan for importing:
>
> I will use Microsoft Building Footprint Data with Bing satellite imagery,
> using JOSM
> If someone has been drawed manually already, MapWithAI has a feature to
> detect if the area
> has a building drawed already, and won't download the data repeatly, so
> they can keep the work therefore doesn't interfere with these other efforts
>
> I will check of blatant errors such as the building no longer to exist or
> wrongly generated by AI
> such as a building outline in farmland that not exist while importing to.
>
> Area to import:
> Any Cities and towns California, United States if the buildings there area
> not mapped already is there are to
>
> data to import:
> Buildings shapes that projected to ground, no other information such as
> address or height
>
> There are lucky for mapper who mapping United States is the plenty of
> ultra high resolution of satellite imagery, and imagery date checkup in
> Bing satellite imagery with JOSM. Most urban area are very new as
> within 1~2 years
>
> Every building object will be tagged with
> source=microsoft/BuildingFootprints. Changeset comment will be tagged with
> the area such as Town or City, for example : *Imperial County,
> California *or *Rural area nearby of Visalia, California *
>
> Goal:
> Goal are following:
> Build the map and build community.
> To add every building really exist but unmapped in the United States to
> OpenStreetMap without creating duplicates.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/US/BingBuildings#Goals
>
> Thanks to Microsoft's AI system and satellite imagery provider
>
> No other datasets will be used with this import. If a building unmapped
> and if Microsoft Building Footprint Data has no data, either leave unmapped
> and draw manually. Such case, I will add source=manual_draw
>
> No monetary remuneration will be received of this import
>
> -------
>
>
> 11.12.2020, 16:46, "Minh Nguyen" <[email protected]>:
>
>
>
> Can you elaborate on your plans? The two pages you linked to are
> detailed but intended as only a starting point for various import
> efforts. In and of themselves, they don't satisfy the import guideline's
> requirement for fully documenting your proposed import on the wiki. For
> example, see the full proposals listed in the table at [1].
>
>
>  Data to Import=building outlines
>  Area=Cities and towns California, United States, if the area not mapped
>  and existing in reality and able to seen in Bing satellite imagery
>  source=Microsoft building footprints
>
>
> Can you be more specific? There are a number of completed, ongoing, and
> planned building imports in California. [2] It's important that your
> import doesn't interfere with these other efforts. In fact, perhaps you
> should consider contributing to those efforts, if you haven't already.
> (For context, I've helped with the San Jose building import, which is
> still ongoing and would welcome help with task completion or validation.
> [3])
>
> Have you considered any other datasets before deciding to import the
> Microsoft building dataset? In California, we're lucky that works by
> state and local government agencies are automatically in the public
> domain by law. So for many cities and counties, there are likely better
> alternatives to the Microsoft building dataset. These alternatives
> typically contain attributes that Microsoft's computer vision-based
> approach could not obtain, such as addresses and building heights, and
> the geometries may be more accurate. If this is the case, I think there
> would be a strong argument for preferring the local dataset and only
> falling back to the Microsoft dataset in areas that aren't so fortunate.
>
> Thank you for your consideration and enthusiasm for improving our
> coverage of California.
>
> [1]
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Microsoft_Building_Footprint_Data#Related_import_proposals
> [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Import_from_California
> [3]
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County,_California/San_Jose_building_import
>
> --
> [email protected]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports-us mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports-us mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
>
_______________________________________________
Imports-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us

Reply via email to