We're having the meeting at a pub, Fado's in Seattle, so I'm not sure a hangout would work well.
That said, if anyone's interested, I'll bring my laptop and set it up. I'll be sure your question about merges & feeds & updates is on the agenda. It would be awesome to have some sort of feed into a review process and then out to OSM after review. Thanks! On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:54 AM, the Old Topo Depot <[email protected]>wrote: > Jeff et al, > > Glad to see this discussion about Seattle data. I was going to ask you to > set up a Google Hangout for the meeting but I unfortunately have other > commitments this evening. > > I wanted to ask if consideration has been (or will be) given to techniques > that enable future imports to be easily merged in the event that the City > updates some or all of the source layers. > > Looking forward to a recap of the discussion this evening, including a > detailed report and evaluation of the beers consumed. > > Best, > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Jeff Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Whoops! Should have cc'd imports@ >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Jeff Meyer <[email protected]> >> Date: Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:40 PM >> Subject: Re: [Imports] City of Seattle imports >> To: Serge Wroclawski <[email protected]> >> >> >> Serge - apologies for the confusing formatting. I use Gmail's web client. >> It's not the problem. I human formatted the message to look nice in Google, >> forgetting that the listserv software doesn't do well when people put in >> their own (poorly-chosen) bullets. The general format was: >> [your comment] >> \>\> [my reply] >> \>\>\>\> [subcomment of mine to my own reply] >> >> Many of your responses are based around assertions about what OSM and >> what OSM is not, and what's important and what's not, but I'm not sure >> those are relevant to the topic at hand. I'll focus on responses relevant >> for the import of City of Seattle data. My goal is to help create better >> documentation of best practices for imports. If there's a document like >> this that I've missed, please let me know. >> >> SW: Those scripts and datafiles need to be part of any discussion, as early >> as possible. >> JM: We identified these files and developed preliminary scripts a couple >> days ago. >> Here are a couple - these may not be the only sources considered for >> import: >> https://data.seattle.gov/dataset/Master-Address-File/3vsa-a788 >> https://data.seattle.gov/dataset/Street-Network-Database/afip-2mzr >> https://data.seattle.gov/dataset/2009-Building-Outlines/y7u8-vad7 >> >> SW: Manually in that you will be adding all features by hand, you, >> yourself? >> JM: I'm not sure why you are asking if I'll be doing this myself. This >> email thread contains several references to people who will be assisting. >> Cliff Snow and others attending the meeting to discuss this import. We hope >> to have a team of local mappers focus on imports where they have local >> expertise. >> >> SW: What long time, trusted, local OSM community member do you have working >> with you on this? >> JM: I'm not sure who decides how long is long enough or who is trusted. >> Right now, Steve Coast is planning to attend our planning meeting & will >> hopefully be reviewing our plans. That said, a good import process should >> be well documented, stand on its own, and not be dependent on this type of >> participation. >> >> SW: Discussion is better than notice, and imports isn't the greater US >> community >> forum, talk-us is. >> JM: Perhaps I miscommunicated what I meant by "notice" - I was hoping to >> start an email discussion by giving notice of our intent to commence our >> import planning with the e-mail to imports@ >> >> Thanks, >> Jeff >> >> "Be nice." - Dalton, Road House >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Serge Wroclawski <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Jeff, >>> >>> I've read this mail over several times, and simply find it hard to >>> parse. I don't know what email program you use, but standard email >>> in-line reply is > for a quote and >> for a quote of a quote. The >>> style you've adopted makes it hard for me to identify whose quoted and >>> in reponse to what >>> >>> For more information on in-line quoting, see >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Quoted_line_prefix >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Jeff Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > source tags are not really appropriate for indivdual elements, >>> >>> How do you identify when individual elements of the same way or node >>> are >>> >>> derived from different sources? >>> >>> One of the key important elements to understand about OSM is that OSM >>> is not a collection of sources, but is in fact a single unified >>> dataset. >>> >>> Except in a few exceptional cases (which I'll address later) we do not >>> care that a features comes from one person or one source and not >>> another. >>> >>> In fact, what's been shown is that "official" sources are a problem, >>> as people are hesitant to edit them, where we want people to be not >>> just be practically, but encouraged to edit. But when something is >>> stamped with "official" or from an external dataset, they're less >>> likely to. >>> >>> Now, there are times when you want to know what source something came >>> from, and this is where changeset tags are far more useful. >>> >>> For example, let's say there's a road, and someone adds it from some >>> local datasource. Someone else may look at the feature in imagery and >>> change its geometry. In that case, we'd like to know what imagery they >>> looked at. >>> >>> But in OSM all of these techniques are considered secondary. Our >>> primary and always preferred method for data are people surveying. We >>> would always prefer, and should always favor a person on the ground >>> against other sources, and surveying doesn't have a "source". >>> >>> >>> >>>>> I didn't see any discussion or dispute of this approach on the wiki >>> >>>>> page, so I'm assuming it's ok. >>> >>> This is a bad assumption. It's heavily debated, and largely deprecated >>> in favor of changeset tags. >>> >>> I realize I addressed this above, but please, stop adding >>>>> to >>> your mails, this is odd and confusing. >>> >>> > more importantly, the specific >>> > datasets should be referenced, as data.seattle.gov doesn't talk about >>> > the version of the data, or even what dataset it is. >>> >>> Good points. We will add these clarifications. >>> >>> > Where is the source of your transformation scripts? >>> >>> From the email above: "some translation instructions Cliff has put >>> >>> together." We will include the specific translation code either at a >>> github >>> >>> page or on the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seattle page. >>> >>> > Where are the specific data files you're transforming? >>> >>> They are at data.seattle.gov & we will provide links to the >>> sources. We >>> >>> will also consider posting separate snapshots of these source >>> datafiles if >>> >>> we can figure out where to host them. >>> >>> Those scripts and datafiles need to be part of any discussion, as >>> early as possible. >>> >>> > How will you handle object conflation? >>> >>> Manually and methodically. >>> >>> Manually in that you will be adding all features by hand, you, yourself? >>> >>> >>> Please identify any un-discussed concerns. I'd like to make sure >>> we've >>> >>> accounted for them all. >>> >>> Imports should generally not be done by those who do not have a long, >>> long history with OSM. Bad imports are not simply the same as bad >>> edits, but have long, multi-year consequences that communities >>> sometimes never dig out of. >>> >>> What long time, trusted, local OSM community member do you have >>> working with you on this? >>> >>> > but more generally, you seem to not have discussed this with the >>> greater OSM >>> > community, including the talk-us list. >>> >>> >>> I thought that imports@ was the "Greater OSM community." >>> >>> See above. >>> >>> >>> From the email above: "A group of Seattle OSM'ers (led by Cliff >>> Snow) are >>> >>> getting together to discuss the methods for importing and >>> double-checking >>> >>> the information. >>> > http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Seattle/events/93524692/ >>> >>> >>> I will forward the prior notice to talk-us@ >>> >>> Discussion is better than notice, and imports isn't the greater US >>> community forum, talk-us is. >>> >>> >>> advise as to the checklist steps we are not following, or which >>> steps should >>> >>> be added to this checklist? >>> >>> See above. >>> >>> - Serge >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Meyer >> Global World History Atlas >> www.gwhat.org >> [email protected] >> 206-676-2347 >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Meyer >> Global World History Atlas >> www.gwhat.org >> [email protected] >> 206-676-2347 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Imports mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports >> >> > > > -- > John Novak > 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676) > > -- Jeff Meyer Global World History Atlas www.gwhat.org [email protected] 206-676-2347
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
