[Imports] SF Building Height Import Mapathon (March 14, 2017) @ Mapbox SF

2017-03-07 Thread maning sambale
Hi, We are doing a mapathon for the SF building height import at Mapbox SF office. Details about the event here: https://www.meetup.com/Maptime-SF/events/232888163/ Brandon Liu will lead this event. If your in town, please join. -- cheers, maning sambale

[Imports] Duplicated buildings in the Miami building import

2017-02-27 Thread maning sambale
Hi, To the import team, great job in importing the buildings in Miami. While validating the changesets using [OSMCha](https://osmcha.mapbox.com/), I came across one [changeset](https://osmcha.mapbox.com/46393859/) where I found some overlapping and duplicate buildings. Please advise mappers to r

[Imports] (Cleanup of LABuilding import (was Re: Updates:LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA))

2016-08-01 Thread maning sambale
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:56 PM, maning sambale wrote: > Christoph, > > Thank you for the observation. > > Specific to "roads now intersect buildings indicating that mapping is > inaccurate - like here:" > The

Re: [Imports] Updates:LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-07-21 Thread maning sambale
nd will be fixed during the cleanup/validation stage. Keep your comments and suggestions coming! Will ticket each one and fix whatever we can. Thanks! On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 8:14 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Tuesday 19 July 2016, maning sambale wrote: >> >> Another round

Re: [Imports] Updates:LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-07-19 Thread maning sambale
ngs - Wiki - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Los_angeles,_California/Buildings_Import On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 8:07 PM, maning sambale wrote: > Hi, > > Over the past month, since we started the LA building import [0], > ~330K buildings were added by 74 different users [1]. We ran sev

[Imports] Updates:LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-05-05 Thread maning sambale
[3] https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues [4] https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues/88 On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 8:48 PM, maning sambale wrote: > Hi, > > We've started the import this during MaptimeLA [0] last April 2. > First project focused on Southside LA [1]. >

Re: [Imports] RFC: LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-04-11 Thread maning sambale
/2 [2] https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Thursday 24 March 2016, maning sambale wrote: >> >> > - Tagging still looks vague. What you have on >> > https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/blob/master/

Re: [Imports] RFC: LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-03-24 Thread maning sambale
Dear Cristoph, > - Tagging still looks vague. What you have on > https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/blob/master/README.md is just a > list of OSM keys to use but there is no information on the values - Right, I updated the wiki to describe the tags. Still a work in progress, but see here: ht

Re: [Imports] RFC: LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-03-21 Thread maning sambale
/Los_angeles,_California/Buildings_Import#Mapathons On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:24 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > >> Am 14.03.2016 um 13:17 schrieb maning sambale : >> >> Regarding your suggestions, should we add the GeneralUse in the >> buil

[Imports] RFC: LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-03-14 Thread maning sambale
Hi Martin, > It looks as if you are mapping building uses to the key "building" in OSM, > but the building key is for building types: > https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/blob/master/mappings_csv/GeneralUse.csv > You should have a look at the building:use key for usage. The way the conversi

[Imports] RFC: LA County building import (Los Angeles, California, USA)

2016-03-14 Thread maning sambale
Hi Christoph, > On the whole the plan looks solid but it seems somewhat vague in some parts to me at this time: > - there is no information on tagging > - there is no assessment of the geometric accuracy of the source data > - there does not seem to be any abstract specification coming with the