Very cool Kevin, I’m looking forward to the +Vivid release! On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:40 AM Kevin Bullock <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Everyone, it's Kevin representing DigitalGlobe. I do understand the > situation and I think some good points have been made in this thread. If > you've seen my SOTM presentations from last year, I have spoken at length > about the DG business model of licensing data. In short, we do this to > sustain our business and to operate, develop and launch more satellites! > > I'm happy to report we are making progress towards an exciting option that > would allow DG to publish an imagery layer directly for OpenStreetMap > editing. This is being funded by a group of organizations, and would make > the +Vivid imagery layer available for registered OSM editors (the source > for Facebook). I am hoping this will resolve many of the concerns for > validation. The timeframe for this is likely 4-8 weeks. It will likely > warrant a new thread/forum somewhere instead of being embedded in the > Thailand thread and this one. > > Thanks to everyone for their feedback and agreeing with the sentiment of > appreciation to Facebook for all the work they are doing to improve OSM and > sending informative communications. > > Kevin Bullock > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Andy Townsend <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 16/03/2017 21:46, Kate Chapman wrote: > > 1. We can't demand more of Facebook than others doing imports. When a > government releases data under an open license we don't demand to see the > imagery they used to make it. I purchase the same imagery Facebook does for > my job and our license also ensures that we have the rights to release the > derived vectors under the license we choose. I think this is sufficient. > > > Indeed, but it's worth bearing in mind a couple of points: > > 1) One is that unless people can compare the source DG imagery with the > the derived roads, it's not possible to judge the process. The first time > that Facebook tried something like this in Egypt nad Thailand there were a > very large number of false positives - many straight edges with a contrast > change in the image (e.g. the edges of drainage channels in Egypt) were > detected as "roads", and even with real roads there were many connectivity > issues. It may well be that the method by which roads are now detected is > much improved (but it looks like image 3 may show some of the same > connectivity detection problems as before), but without access to the DG > imagery used, no-one can tell. > > 2) The discussion on the Thai forum has suggested that it'd be useful for > OSM mappers to access the DG imagery for mapping purposes other than road > derivation (see e.g. > https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=632472#p632472 and > https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=634119#p634119 ). > > Obviously there may be commercial hurdles to climb in order to do either > of these, but it'd be difficult to comment on the accuracy of the the > import without at least (1). However in case people are unaware DG have > already responded in the forum thread > https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=634735#p634735 and said > "we are looking at options to publish", so this may be in hand. > > Best Regards, > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > Imports mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports > > > _______________________________________________ > Imports mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports >
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
