On Sep 6, 2018, at 4:30 PM, john whelan wrote:
> The pilot project itself did manage to get a fair amount of accurate data
> into OSM. That data is still there and can be used. It was instrumental in
> supporting the HOT summit in Ottawa. It managed to raise awareness within
> local
> Threads here, consensus and the wiki declared it dead, as it failed on a
number of fronts, primarily that it didn't respect OSM in certain ways in
which OSM must be respected.
The pilot project itself did manage to get a fair amount of accurate data
into OSM. That data is still there and can
On Sep 6, 2018, at 1:14 PM, john whelan wrote (replying
to me, stevea):
> > Hm, we tried to revive the wiki, a tried-and-true OSM methodology for doing
> > EXACTLY that. Is there something wrong with that idea?
>
> No this project was initiated by Stats Canada, but without clear requirements
> Hm, we tried to revive the wiki, a tried-and-true OSM methodology for
doing EXACTLY that. Is there something wrong with that idea?
No this project was initiated by Stats Canada, but without clear
requirements or feedback about what had been achieved. The Stats Can side
wasn't dependant on
> Personally I think if the BC2020i is to be revived mappers really need some
> feedback on what has been done and what tags are of interest.
Hm, we tried to revive the wiki, a tried-and-true OSM methodology for doing
EXACTLY that. Is there something wrong with that idea?
I've been trying to
It looks pretty but misses the detail in the magic step then a miracle
occurs.
Currently wind is the cheapest renewable energy source. Off shore works
well but the central area of North America works fine. Unfortunately New
York, Toronto, Montreal were all established in relatively wind free
This is cool. Could we not develop a BC2020i challenge similar to the ECCE
annual challenge? (See McMaster University Team’s winning ECCE 2018 entry:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRb_g1llT00=youtu.be=PLdgq5G0ox73VEQFJd4No6peb4NP-GFbdU
Jonathan
7 matches
Mail list logo
