Pierre looking at the Microsoft imports south of the border and their
process is undoubtedly sensible.
I suggest waiting until we have got some movement on the current import
rather than try to tackle to many things at once.
Cheerio John
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 1:47 PM Pierre Béland, wrote:
>
John,
Exprime tu simplement une opinion, ou as-tu vérifié les procédures d'import
incluant correction des données et validé la qualité des données importées aux
États-Unis ? Considères-tu la qualité des données dans la base OSM aux
États-Unis comparable à ce qui s'est fait au Canada l'an
> As stated before, I don't consider the Microsoft dataset being close to
the minimum quality requirements I would expect from any automated
building entry into OSM.
Well yes that is one opinion but we do have a range of opinions in
OpenStreetMap and from the number of buildings that have already
Hi John,
As stated before, I don't consider the Microsoft dataset being close to
the minimum quality requirements I would expect from any automated
building entry into OSM. If you just want to display buildings, you can
download the MS dataset and use it right away - no need to import into
>first, to add missing buildings (if it were
just for this purpose we could also use the much bigger Microsoft
dataset)
I can't resist. Does this infer that for parts of the country without Stat
Can data we are happy to import Microsoft dataset buildings as is? Or
would we wish to wait until we
I could set the task up to be seen only by validators+ which I then can sst
individual users as validators
On Thu., Jan. 16, 2020, 10:10 p.m. Tim Elrick, wrote:
> I would assume in most cases the imported building footprint will be
> more precise than existing data. For me, this would be a
6 matches
Mail list logo
