A number of outlines differ significantly from the Bing aerial layer, ids (is this what foundation level accuracy means ?)
199931669 199931639 199931640 199931659 199931671 199931634 199931638 199931632 will these be manually revised ? If they are, is the City interested in incorporating such updates (refinements) into their data set ? What can we do to enable such a "reverse" flow of data ? There's a statement earlier in the thread that the outlines are updated by the City. As the OSM objects are not carrying any city assigned ids, what's the plan to propagate such updates into OSM as the city makes them available ? Building 199931626 is tagged as name="Miller Center" but a near-by school has no name tag. Did the name originate with the city data ? If so, why is the school not named ? There is a large structure on Heineberg Rd without an outline, is this just due to an arbitrary cut-off of the import or is it not in the City's data ? If I zoom in to the test import area using http://gis.ci.burlington.vt.us/gm/, I see what appear to be addresses. Has the possibility of associating addresses with the buildings been discussed ? The building outlines are are great addition, having them attributed with address info would be absolutely brilliant ! Best, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Werner Poppele <[email protected]> wrote: > William Morris wrote: > >> Thanks all, >> >> And many apologies; I think I sent an old copy of the file that had been >> previously-cached. I have run the JOSM validator on the complete >> building set and removed the multipolygon weirdness, including the >> overlaps Andrew noticed. I also orthogonalized the full set, though this >> required manual revision of some buildings. >> >> I did a test import of about 40 buildings at this location (my own >> neighborhood): >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=44.51239&lon=-73.24811&** >> zoom=17&layers=M<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.51239&lon=-73.24811&zoom=17&layers=M>< >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=44.51239&lon=-73.24811&** >> zoom=17&layers=M<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.51239&lon=-73.24811&zoom=17&layers=M> >> > >> >> >> Let me know if there are any objections to me proceeding with the entire >> city. Thanks to everyone for your input! >> >> -Bill >> >> >> ---------- >> William Morris >> Cartographer >> (802)-870-0880 >> [email protected] >> <mailto:wboykinm@geosprocket.**com<[email protected]> >> > >> >> Twitter: @vtcraghead >> >> GeoSprocket LLC, Burlington VT >> www.geosprocket.com <http://www.geosprocket.com/> >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Imports mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/imports<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports> >> > Good morning, Bill > > The test import looks pretty good, but I have some questions: > > There are buildings having more details than others: adjacent smaller > parts of buildings (garages ?, terraces, ...), the contours of other > buildings are simple rectangles, but on the bing image their contours are > more complex. Whats the reason for this ? Reconstruction of the buildings ? > > The positioning of the buildings look very good. The displacement of > buildings and highways compared to bing imagery seems to be ok. > > If you like, I can offer time to help for postprocessing the import. > Tell me, how I can contribute. > > WernerP > -- > MUSICIANS do it rhythmically > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Imports mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/imports<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports> > -- John Novak 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676) http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnanovak/ OSM ID:oldtopos OSM Heat Map: http://yosmhm.neis-one.org/?oldtopos OSM Edit Stats:http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?oldtopos
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
