Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
Hi Bill, This location ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.29693&lon=-75.87369&zoom=17&layers=M) has a number of hand editing building outlines. If the data you're looking at is reasonably close in quality to this area then I think we should discuss going ahead with the addition of your outlines. Best, On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:46 AM, William Morris wrote: > So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license upgrade: > > -- John Novak Novacell Technologies and the Old Topo Depot http://www.novacell.com 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: > > On 4/2/2012 12:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> > >> I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting > >> point for local mappers, especially those without a GPS setup. > > > > > > This is definitely true for those of us in areas with few mappers. > > For some of you. I've had conversations with approximately equal > numbers of mappers who feel as you do, and potential mappers who look > at TIGER and say, "Finished. Nothing for me to do." And there are > those who arrive and look at TIGER and say, "I have to start by fixing > that mess? No thanks." Then OSM is doing a bad job at messaging. It's no longer just a road network project, it's a map project. We should show that there's other data to add beyond a semi-complete TIGER import. If you show a new person openstreetmap.org and they say to you "done!" and move on, then you should ask them if their house, their school, their zoo, their supermarket, etc. are on the map and to add them if they're not. If you're not there, then we should think about how to have the website ask for you. Let's stop blaming people trying to improve the map by adding data in the right way and start looking at ways to help those that are distracted by all that data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: > On 4/2/2012 12:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> >> I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting >> point for local mappers, especially those without a GPS setup. > > > This is definitely true for those of us in areas with few mappers. For some of you. I've had conversations with approximately equal numbers of mappers who feel as you do, and potential mappers who look at TIGER and say, "Finished. Nothing for me to do." And there are those who arrive and look at TIGER and say, "I have to start by fixing that mess? No thanks." ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
On 4/2/2012 12:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting point for local mappers, especially those without a GPS setup. This is definitely true for those of us in areas with few mappers. OSM would be largely useless here without the TIGER import. Not completely, mind you, but it's not much good if it's only got Interstates and US highways. -Nathan ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
On 4/2/2012 12:18 PM, Richard Weait wrote: I think imports (taking a large number of objects from an external source and placing them in OSM all at once) is bad for the community. Most of you have heard me say this before. I still have no hard evidence to prove it. There is also no hard counter-evidence. At best, imported data will be unmaintained. I glibly offer most TIGER ways as evidence. I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting point for local mappers, especially those without a GPS setup. No comment on the proposed import. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:46 AM, William Morris wrote: > So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license upgrade: > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/umd_subset.osm > > That's an extract of the UVM-SAL building footprints I'd like to > import for swathes of MD and PA. My workflow for killing existing > feature conflicts actually went best without involving ESRI at all: > > 1.) In QGIS, Set up 0.2-degree import grid over new building coverage areas > 2.) Pull down one grid cell worth of OSM data using the QGIS OSM plugin > 3.) Add building footprint .shp, select all footprints that intersect > OSM lines or polygons > 4.) Switch selection, save as new .shp > 5.) Run ogr2osm.py on new .shp (Special thanks to Andrew Guertin for > running me through that process) > 6.) Open new .osm file in JOSM, add building tags, upload. > 7.) Repeat for next import grid cell > > Tedious, but it'll get the job done. And a reminder: I do not intend > to add any building footprint that conflicts with an existing feature, > adhering to the OSM preference for user-added features over imports. > Now soliciting thoughts, roadblocks, expressions of ennui, etc. > Thanks! > > -Bill Morris My objection is a generic one and one that has been heard before on this channel. To be clear, I do not wish to criticise Bill; he appears to be following the bulk edit guidelines and he is engaging in the discussions here. That's fantastic. Bill, welcome to the community. I think imports (taking a large number of objects from an external source and placing them in OSM all at once) is bad for the community. Most of you have heard me say this before. I still have no hard evidence to prove it. There is also no hard counter-evidence. At best, imported data will be unmaintained. I glibly offer most TIGER ways as evidence. I ask you to suspend disbelief for a moment, and presume that imports are generally bad, and presume that adding new mappers is generally good. Can we try something new? Can we use this building data as motivation to get new mappers in those areas so that specific mappers will have a stronger connection to the data in specific areas? Something like this: - Let's set a smaller grid. Something like a large suburban arterial block, say 1.5km / 1 mi square. - If you want to import the buildings in one grid square, you have to find a new mapper in that area, and they have to do an on the ground survey of some part of that area. - You can only do so in areas that are no more than four grid squares from your home location (or work location). This is a cross between "adding game-features to OSM", "banning imports" and "having users adopt part of the map". :-) This could be really beneficial to a new mapper. They could survey the local fire station, police station, hospital and schools, and perhaps the businesses on the main street, and a few local shopping malls. They get all of those business names, and they'll be completely up to date. They'll add them to the map, and they don't have to trace as many building outlines, because they have the external source available. What I hope this will encourage is: - new mappers in those areas - who will do new foot surveys of interesting things - and will feel attached to the data - and keep it up to date over time. And, if the new mapper understands that the building data for their area is a "reward", they are unlikely to be frustrated or discouraged by it if some buildings end up in the wrong place. the new mapper will just fix them. And carry on mapping. I know that what I suggest is much harder than simply importing the data from one or two accounts. I suggest that the benefit of finding and encouraging new mappers in your area is much greater than just having new building outlines in your area. Now the Negative Army will jump in and say, "That's too hard.", "That will never work.", "I want buildings now." You can take leadership on this. Are you the only active mapper in your city or region, or one of only a few? Do this. Be a leader. Grow the community and then you won't be able to keep up with the growth of the map. Build new contributors. (And host local OSM groups.) Thanks for letting me hijack your thread, Bill. :-) Best regards, Richard. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities
So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license upgrade: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/umd_subset.osm That's an extract of the UVM-SAL building footprints I'd like to import for swathes of MD and PA. My workflow for killing existing feature conflicts actually went best without involving ESRI at all: 1.) In QGIS, Set up 0.2-degree import grid over new building coverage areas 2.) Pull down one grid cell worth of OSM data using the QGIS OSM plugin 3.) Add building footprint .shp, select all footprints that intersect OSM lines or polygons 4.) Switch selection, save as new .shp 5.) Run ogr2osm.py on new .shp (Special thanks to Andrew Guertin for running me through that process) 6.) Open new .osm file in JOSM, add building tags, upload. 7.) Repeat for next import grid cell Tedious, but it'll get the job done. And a reminder: I do not intend to add any building footprint that conflicts with an existing feature, adhering to the OSM preference for user-added features over imports. Now soliciting thoughts, roadblocks, expressions of ennui, etc. Thanks! -Bill Morris -- William Morris Cartographer (802)-870-0880 wboyk...@geosprocket.com Twitter: @vtcraghead GeoSprocket LLC, Burlington VT www.geosprocket.com On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:35 PM, William Morris wrote: > Ian, Honestly - and with a certain amount of shame - I had planned to just > pull both sets of buildings into ArcMap and run location SQL (select from > UVM-SAL buildings where intersect with OSM buildings), then invert the > selection and export. It seemed like this approach is conservative toward > OSM feature preservation and might also be good for QA/QC in small batches. > Unfortunately I'm noticing that the cloudmade shapefile zips don't include > buildings. Moving on to the next idea . . . > > Josh, I would happily assist on the plugin if I knew the first thing about > Java. I'm more inclined to lean on GDAL/OGR in the backend, but I agree it > would be fantastic to have this functionality in the editors. > > -B > > > > On Thursday, March 22, 2012, Josh Doe wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Ian Dees wrote: >>> Personally, I'm most interested in discovering how you're planning on >>> doing >>> the conflict detection between the incoming data and existing OSM data. >>> The >>> import list has been interested in something like that for a long time >>> and >>> we haven't really had something that did it right. >> >> Sounds like this could be a good application of the conflation plugin >> I've been working on. I'm in the process of integrating the Java >> Topology Suite (JTS) and the Java Conflation Suite (JCS) which offers >> some pretty powerful matching features based on attributes (tags), >> distance, overlap, etc. Like others have said, this would still need >> to be done at a local level in small chunks, which is good since the >> plugin likely can't handle matching more than 5000 or so objects >> without taking forever. I'd be glad to have help on the plugin >> however, my nights and weekends have been pretty busy lately... >> >> -Josh >> ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
