Yes, my understanding is that this first step would be filling in the gaps from
the previous import. After that, with that knowledge built up of the import, a
second stage would look at the more complex process of update, merge,
conflation of previously imported data.
-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:55 AM, David Jackson (OCTO) <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>
>Serge,
>
>
>Thanks for your valuable feedback.
>
>
>The buildings that are being imported have very little overlap with the
>existing buildings in OSM. The areas targeted for building / address import
>are those ones where either no or very few existing building polygons exist in
>OSM.
>
>
>The buildings being imported are of the same dataset as the buildings loaded
>in the previous batch import.
>
>
>- David
>
>
>
>David Jackson | GIS Analyst | Office of the Chief technology Officer
>
>(W) 202.724.5135 | 200 I ST SE, 5TH FL, Washington, DC
>[email protected] | Blog: dcaddresscoordinates.blogspot.com
>
>Telework Day: Fri
>
>
>
>On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Serge Wroclawski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>David,
>>
>>I have a number of concerns about the import proposal.
>>
>>Firstly, your goal is stated to add ~66,000 buildings and addresses to
>>the OSM map. This builds on the work of the previous building import
>>in DC which was never completed. There is nothing in this proposal
>>about the existing buildings and addresses, about any conflation or
>>updates.
>>
>>This concerns me, as it means that part of the city will have new
>>data, part of the city will have old data, and there is no plan to
>>correct/update as part of this process.
>>
>>Secondly, your schedule is far too agressive. Giving the OSM community
>>two days to review your plan is simply not reasonable. You must
>>provide people the opportunity to review your proposal, ask questions,
>>review your data, review your process, get answers, review those
>>answers. I would say that two of meaningful discussion would be a
>>miniumum that it would be possible to do this in, not 48 hours.
>>
>>I haven't even had a chance to get to the data yet.
>>
>>Thirdly, this proposal doesn't mention who will be doing the import
>>work. I suspect that based on the supporters that this means that the
>>import will be done using paid staff. Is that correct? If it's not
>>correct, what plans/process will you use for working with the local
>>community to do this work? If it is correct, and you will be using
>>paid staff, based on the tremendous problems that this caused NYC on a
>>multitude of fronts, what steps will you be taking to address the
>>problems of oversight, of integration, etc. that we had in NYC?
>>
>>This ties directly into your aggressive schedule. How do you know the
>>work will only take until June 30th?
>>
>>Fourthly, I'd like to know if there is any contact/money/services
>>exchanging hands that is in any way connected with this import. This
>>isn't part of the guidelines, but based on the supporters explicitly
>>listed, I think this is a question that the community deserves to know
>>the answer to.
>>
>>- Serge Wroclawski
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Imports mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Imports mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
