Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[john whelan]

I think at this point in time we need to try to get some sort of agreement
on how to proceed.  My first thought would be to ban the youngsters so
anyone under 65 shouldn't be involved.  That way it would slow the process
down unfortunately it isn't really practical.

I think we need time to digest and review what has been done so far.  I
think it would be sensible for a different mapper to go over the imported
areas using the task manager and verify the buildings against Bing or other
imagery to ensure we haven't introduced an imaginary town etc.

I do think we need to break the import up into more manageable chunks.
Whether these need to be at municipal level or not needs thought.  The case
for is that would allow the data from different sources to be carefully
checked over. The case against is there are a lot of municipalities and in
places like Manitoba there are very few mappers on the ground.

Basically from a population point of view Canada is a collection of around
half a dozen cities and these have a local OSM community.  Montreal,
Ottawa, Vancouver, Toronto for example.  Once you take these out then you
have much smaller numbers.  I'm not certain about Calgary and Edmonton
whether they have a local community or not.

Quebec with its own mailing list is self contained and I think will sort
itself out in time.  Montreal is working together to sort something out.

Terraced houses in Ottawa we just have the outline with a tag of terrace.
This was the way they were mapped even before the City of Ottawa import.
Units may have an individual address node.

At the moment I favour breaking the country up into provinces and for each
province depending on the number of buildings I might split it up again.
So Ontario would be something like Ontario rural and Toronto but I'm not
quite sure of where Toronto begins and ends.

Thoughts and bear in mind that Microsoft has released buildings for Canada
as well.  I haven't noticed an import plan but it would be fairly easy for
someone to bring in some buildings so to retain some sort of control a plan
might well be useful.

Thanks John



On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 15:34, Tim Elrick  wrote:

> I think, Montreal's OSMappers would appreciate to discuss the import of
> the buildings there first on the local list. By the way, John, I have never
> said I would be taking the lead for the entirety of Québec (at least, at
> the moment). However, I feel that the import should be discussed on the
> liste OSM de Québec first.
>
> Danny, I disagree with you on the import of building blocks. I find it
> much more tedious to discern them later, then splitting them into single
> buildings first before importing, because, I think, you need to know your
> neighbourhood very well to find unsplit buildings in the OSM database.
> Doing this for a whole town or even city (like Montreal) would take much
> longer than pre-processing.
>
> As for the rest, I have some understanding for the impatience of OSMappers
> about the moratorium on the import - as quite some time has passed and the
> discussion hasn't really moved on nor has the development of the
> countrywide import plan [1] - last change there was beginning of February.
>
> Having looked at the Microsoft data and compared quality to the Open
> Building Database in two places (Montréal, QC and Williams Lake, BC), I
> would suggest to refrain from using it as a source for importing, unless
> you verify them for small areas (but then you can almost draw them by
> hand). In dense areas like downtown Montréal the building footprints are in
> many cases plainly wrong (see my contribution to this list on 2019-03-02,
> 19h57 EST), in more scattered areas and suburban landscapes buildings are
> randomly aligned and quite some buildings are missing (my unverified
> estimate is about 5-10%).
>
> As for the Open Building database, it is important to discern the data by
> the sources as each municipality that contributed data might have used
> different methods and has different mapping standards. Now add the
> disagreement on this list about orthogonalization and building details. I
> think, this suggests breaking up the import plan in smaller batches; for
> the start it can be cloned from the original one, but the pre-processing
> and import process might differ due to how data sources might need to be
> treated as well as how local OSM communities would like to go forward.
>
> What do you reckon?
>
> Tim
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada_Building_Import
>
>
> On 2019-03-15 14:01, John Whelan wrote:
> Which I think comes back to defining the local mappers.
>
> There has been discussion on Montreal as well and not all Ontario thinks
> the same way.  Ottawa local mappers for example have different opinions to
> Pierre and Nate on what is acceptable and I'm under the impression that not
> everyone in Toronto agrees with Nate's position.
>
> We seem to be blocking out parts of the country such as Montreal is this a
> reasonable appro

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Tim Elrick]

I think, Montreal's OSMappers would appreciate to discuss the import of 
the buildings there first on the local list. By the way, John, I have 
never said I would be taking the lead for the entirety of Québec (at 
least, at the moment). However, I feel that the import should be 
discussed on the liste OSM de Québec first.


Danny, I disagree with you on the import of building blocks. I find it 
much more tedious to discern them later, then splitting them into single 
buildings first before importing, because, I think, you need to know 
your neighbourhood very well to find unsplit buildings in the OSM 
database. Doing this for a whole town or even city (like Montreal) would 
take much longer than pre-processing.


As for the rest, I have some understanding for the impatience of 
OSMappers about the moratorium on the import - as quite some time has 
passed and the discussion hasn't really moved on nor has the development 
of the countrywide import plan [1] - last change there was beginning of 
February.


Having looked at the Microsoft data and compared quality to the Open 
Building Database in two places (Montréal, QC and Williams Lake, BC), I 
would suggest to refrain from using it as a source for importing, unless 
you verify them for small areas (but then you can almost draw them by 
hand). In dense areas like downtown Montréal the building footprints are 
in many cases plainly wrong (see my contribution to this list on 
2019-03-02, 19h57 EST), in more scattered areas and suburban landscapes 
buildings are randomly aligned and quite some buildings are missing (my 
unverified estimate is about 5-10%).


As for the Open Building database, it is important to discern the data 
by the sources as each municipality that contributed data might have 
used different methods and has different mapping standards. Now add the 
disagreement on this list about orthogonalization and building details. 
I think, this suggests breaking up the import plan in smaller batches; 
for the start it can be cloned from the original one, but the 
pre-processing and import process might differ due to how data sources 
might need to be treated as well as how local OSM communities would like 
to go forward.


What do you reckon?

Tim

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada_Building_Import


On 2019-03-15 14:01, John Whelan wrote:
Which I think comes back to defining the local mappers.

There has been discussion on Montreal as well and not all Ontario thinks 
the same way.  Ottawa local mappers for example have different opinions 
to Pierre and Nate on what is acceptable and I'm under the impression 
that not everyone in Toronto agrees with Nate's position.


We seem to be blocking out parts of the country such as Montreal is this 
a reasonable approach?


Can we find someway to loosely define local groups and their areas of 
responsibility and how to contact them?


For example one small Ontario city has to my knowledge one OpenStreetMap 
mapper who maps very occasionally.  My understanding is they would be 
quite happy to see an import happen but many of the buildings have 
already been mapped although not to the accuracy that the Stats Can data 
offers. How do you deal with these smaller cities and townships?


Thanks

Cheerio John

Paul Norman via Talk-ca wrote on 2019-03-15 1:45 PM:

On 2019-03-15 9:07 a.m., Andrew Lester wrote:

I disagree. Silence won't solve anything.

I'm speaking here as a local BC mapper, and I strongly disa gree with 
these recent imports.


I'm also a BC mapper, and have only seen the consultation happen over 
Ontario, not BC.



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


--
Sent from Postbox 



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Pierre Béland via Talk-ca]

John, 

les contributeurs de Ottawa, vous semblez en général d'accord pour poursuivre 
les imports et avez la capacité technique de faire des imports rapides, ce que 
vous avez démontré.  Il ne manque qu'un petit pas à franchir et discuter de la 
qualité des données et accepter de tenir compte des communautés en général.
Essaies tu de dire que les 6 contributeurs qui ont fait des imports se sont 
limités à des territoires locaux, voire leur province et ont discuté avec les 
communautés locales sur la méthodologie satisfaisante pour corriger les données 
avant l'import ?   Pour le Québec, je peux te dire que non.

Je constate plutot un refus de discuter et une volonté de poursuivre malgré les 
opinions divergentes. Et la qualité ?  J'ai clairement démontré il me semble 
que les tracés imprécis étaient clairement visibles.  Et si je comprends bien, 
nous avons maintenant un million de nouveaux bâtiments que l'on pourrait 
«blanchir» si n'importe qui met un tampon approuv dessus.  Je dois dire que 
l'argument est difficile à avaler.
 
Pierre 
 

Le vendredi 15 mars 2019 14 h 02 min 23 s HAE, John Whelan 
 a écrit :  
 
 Which I think comes back to defining the local mappers.

There has been discussion on Montreal as well and not all Ontario thinks the 
same way.  Ottawa local mappers for example have different opinions to Pierre 
and Nate on what is acceptable and I'm under the impression that not everyone 
in Toronto agrees with Nate's position.

We seem to be blocking out parts of the country such as Montreal is this a 
reasonable approach?

Can we find someway to loosely define local groups and their areas of 
responsibility and how to contact them?

For example one small Ontario city has to my knowledge one OpenStreetMap mapper 
who maps very occasionally.  My understanding is they would be quite happy to 
see an import happen but many of the buildings have already been mapped 
although not to the accuracy that the Stats Can data offers.  How do you deal 
with these smaller cities and townships?

Thanks

Cheerio John  ___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[John Whelan]

Which I think comes back to defining the local mappers.

There has been discussion on Montreal as well and not all Ontario thinks 
the same way.  Ottawa local mappers for example have different opinions 
to Pierre and Nate on what is acceptable and I'm under the impression 
that not everyone in Toronto agrees with Nate's position.


We seem to be blocking out parts of the country such as Montreal is this 
a reasonable approach?


Can we find someway to loosely define local groups and their areas of 
responsibility and how to contact them?


For example one small Ontario city has to my knowledge one OpenStreetMap 
mapper who maps very occasionally.  My understanding is they would be 
quite happy to see an import happen but many of the buildings have 
already been mapped although not to the accuracy that the Stats Can data 
offers.  How do you deal with these smaller cities and townships?


Thanks

Cheerio John

Paul Norman via Talk-ca wrote on 2019-03-15 1:45 PM:

On 2019-03-15 9:07 a.m., Andrew Lester wrote:

I disagree. Silence won't solve anything.

I'm speaking here as a local BC mapper, and I strongly disagree with 
these recent imports.


I'm also a BC mapper, and have only seen the consultation happen over 
Ontario, not BC.



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


--
Sent from Postbox 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Paul Norman via Talk-ca]

On 2019-03-15 9:07 a.m., Andrew Lester wrote:

I disagree. Silence won't solve anything.

I'm speaking here as a local BC mapper, and I strongly disagree with 
these recent imports.


I'm also a BC mapper, and have only seen the consultation happen over 
Ontario, not BC.



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Nate Wessel]

Interesting!

I didn't mean to imply that etymology should be decisive, but that 
linking the name to the history of some beatified person would help 
explain the origin of the 'St'... In this case, seemingly supporting the 
abbreviation, but also referencing an actual 'saint' or two at the same 
time.


I like Danny's suggestion of the pronunciation tag. That seems like the 
most elegant solution if anyone knows IPA. I've always wanted to learn 
it actually but haven't yet had a good enough reason.


Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 1:18 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 13:02, Nate Wessel  wrote:

Don't forget about the various alternative naming tags like alt_name=*, 
short_name=*, loc_name=*, and also name:etymology=* to make things absolutely 
clear.

Having either spelling in one of these alternatives as appropriate would likely 
satisfy any dissenters and make both the full and abbreviated name searchable.

Certainly, but my message is to suggest that "St. Clair Avenue West"
_is_ the full name. We could set up an "expanded name" tag I suppose?

Etymology wise, Wikipedia, citing (as far as I can tell) local
historians, suggests that St. Clair Avenue is named after Augustine
St. Clare, a character in Uncle Tom's Cabin, and the book spells the
last name "St. Clare", never expanded to "Saint".

In any case, suggesting etymology as being decisive for names seems to
me problematic in many ways, especially in Canada where we've
adopted/mangled many names and phrases from other languages.

Thanks,
--Jarek
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[John Whelan]

I think there are two issues here the first is I accept having a large 
number of anything by one mapper has the potential for a systematic error.


If the import is verified by a second mapper independently I assume this 
would be acceptable?


The second is more to do with discussion within the community and is I 
feel more complex.


Cheerio John

Frederik Ramm wrote on 2019-03-15 12:06 PM:

Hi,

On 15.03.19 16:23, Danny McDonald wrote:

I think many people on this list fundamentally misunderstand the way OSM
operates.  Most OSM contributions are made by individuals who see a
gap/mistake in the data and fix it.

True!


It is not a "community process"
where contributions are made by a group of "local mappers" (although
this sometimes happens).

True!

As long as we're talking normal, everyday, "manual" mapping. Like, 100
edits a day, or maybe 1000 edits on a good day.

For things that go beyond a little mapping by the individual, we tend to
have processes, e.g. for imports, for automated edits, for organised edits.

The general idea behind the discuss-these-things-first rules is not that
one mapper is better than another, but quite the opposite: One mapper
alone can actually make stupid mistakes or suffer from bad judgement,
something that the larger community can help against.

Bye
Frederik



--
Sent from Postbox 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[john whelan]

I'm of the opinion that what the city says goes.

We used that in Ottawa with things such as rue Slater rather than Rue
Slater which I understand is more normal in Quebec.

Cheerio John

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 1:19 PM Jarek Piórkowski,  wrote:

> On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 13:02, Nate Wessel  wrote:
> > Don't forget about the various alternative naming tags like alt_name=*,
> short_name=*, loc_name=*, and also name:etymology=* to make things
> absolutely clear.
> >
> > Having either spelling in one of these alternatives as appropriate would
> likely satisfy any dissenters and make both the full and abbreviated name
> searchable.
>
> Certainly, but my message is to suggest that "St. Clair Avenue West"
> _is_ the full name. We could set up an "expanded name" tag I suppose?
>
> Etymology wise, Wikipedia, citing (as far as I can tell) local
> historians, suggests that St. Clair Avenue is named after Augustine
> St. Clare, a character in Uncle Tom's Cabin, and the book spells the
> last name "St. Clare", never expanded to "Saint".
>
> In any case, suggesting etymology as being decisive for names seems to
> me problematic in many ways, especially in Canada where we've
> adopted/mangled many names and phrases from other languages.
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Jarek Piórkowski]

On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 13:02, Nate Wessel  wrote:
> Don't forget about the various alternative naming tags like alt_name=*, 
> short_name=*, loc_name=*, and also name:etymology=* to make things absolutely 
> clear.
>
> Having either spelling in one of these alternatives as appropriate would 
> likely satisfy any dissenters and make both the full and abbreviated name 
> searchable.

Certainly, but my message is to suggest that "St. Clair Avenue West"
_is_ the full name. We could set up an "expanded name" tag I suppose?

Etymology wise, Wikipedia, citing (as far as I can tell) local
historians, suggests that St. Clair Avenue is named after Augustine
St. Clare, a character in Uncle Tom's Cabin, and the book spells the
last name "St. Clare", never expanded to "Saint".

In any case, suggesting etymology as being decisive for names seems to
me problematic in many ways, especially in Canada where we've
adopted/mangled many names and phrases from other languages.

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Andy Townsend]

On 15/03/2019 16:58, Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca wrote:
The word is definitely Saint. St is a contraction and neither proper 
English or French.


I can't comment about Canadian English, but "St" in a placename in 
British English is perfectly OK - St Albans is correct; "Saint Albans" 
is not.


Not that this has any relevant to Canadian placenames of course 
(especially those with a French derivation - "Saint-Denis" is of course 
correct there).


Best Regards,

Andy



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Danny McDonald]

I agree with Jarek, St. should generally not be expanded for English
Canadian street names.  The proper spelling is St. (or St) even if the
pronunciation is Saint.  name:pronunciation (
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name:pronunciation) is a tag that
can capture the pronunciation, if desired.

In Quebec, I believe it is different, and St often is expanded.
DannyMcD
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Kevin Farrugia]

No, I'm referring to the official records of street names held by
municipalities. In many cases, at least in newer developments, they seem to
be abbreviated. If it's officially short form then it would be incorrect to
say it's Saint.

---
Kevin Farrugia

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 1:08 PM Martin Chalifoux 
wrote:

> I think the osm database should use proper words. Abbreviating is a
> rendering issue and many rendering engines can do that. Space constraints
> on signage dictate the use of abbreviations for those.
>
>
>
> On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:50, Kevin Farrugia  wrote:
>
> Hi Jarek,
>
> I agree that of the sign has a short form for saint then it should be that
> way on the map too, as the sign text comes from the official records of
> street names.
>
> I think St. Is better with a period as it makes it less ambiguous to it
> being an abbreviation and it may help screen readers or spoken directions
> in maps provide the right information.
>
> ---
> Kevin F
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 12:44 PM Jarek Piórkowski 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
>> Canadian English city names should not be expanded.
>>
>> I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
>> like to ask people's opinions.
>>
>> My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
>> could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
>> or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
>> Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
>> like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
>> Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
>> "Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
>> for some parts of the road every now and then.
>>
>> As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
>> name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
>> an abbreviation.
>>
>> Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
>> to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
>> acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.
>>
>> Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the lines
>> of:
>> "Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
>> should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?
>>
>> (I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
>> focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
>> don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
>> to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
>> and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)
>>
>> As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
>> be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
>> for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
>> "St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
>> "St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
>> Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
>> Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
>> suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
>> used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)
>>
>> [1]
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
>> [2]
>> https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf
>> [3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
>> [4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
>> [5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
>> [6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
>> [7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Jarek
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca]

I think the osm database should use proper words. Abbreviating is a rendering 
issue and many rendering engines can do that. Space constraints on signage 
dictate the use of abbreviations for those. 



> On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:50, Kevin Farrugia  wrote:
> 
> Hi Jarek,
> 
> I agree that of the sign has a short form for saint then it should be that 
> way on the map too, as the sign text comes from the official records of 
> street names. 
> 
> I think St. Is better with a period as it makes it less ambiguous to it being 
> an abbreviation and it may help screen readers or spoken directions in maps 
> provide the right information.
> 
> ---
> Kevin F
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 12:44 PM Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
>> Canadian English city names should not be expanded.
>> 
>> I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
>> like to ask people's opinions.
>> 
>> My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
>> could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
>> or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
>> Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
>> like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
>> Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
>> "Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
>> for some parts of the road every now and then.
>> 
>> As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
>> name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
>> an abbreviation.
>> 
>> Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
>> to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
>> acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.
>> 
>> Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the lines of:
>> "Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
>> should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?
>> 
>> (I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
>> focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
>> don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
>> to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
>> and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)
>> 
>> As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
>> be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
>> for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
>> "St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
>> "St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
>> Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
>> Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
>> suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
>> used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)
>> 
>> [1] 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
>> [2] https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf
>> [3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
>> [4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
>> [5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
>> [6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
>> [7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> --Jarek
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Kevin Farrugia]

However, the street name is legally "St." in almost all cases, so saint is
wrong.

---
Kevin Farrugia

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 1:00 PM Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca <
talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> The word is definitely Saint. St is a contraction and neither proper
> English or French. It has the same Latin roots as sanctification and
> similar words.
>
> Similarly Av is a contraction for Avenue and not a word.
>
>
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbreviation
>
>
>
> On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:42, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
> Canadian English city names should not be expanded.
>
> I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
> like to ask people's opinions.
>
> My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
> could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
> or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
> Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
> like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
> Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
> "Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
> for some parts of the road every now and then.
>
> As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
> name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
> an abbreviation.
>
> Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
> to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
> acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.
>
> Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the lines
> of:
> "Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
> should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?
>
> (I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
> focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
> don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
> to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
> and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)
>
> As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
> be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
> for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
> "St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
> "St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
> Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
> Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
> suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
> used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
> [2]
> https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf
> [3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
> [4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
> [5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
> [6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
> [7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Nate Wessel]

Don't forget about the various alternative naming tags like alt_name=* 
, short_name=* 
, loc_name=*, and also 
name:etymology=* 
 to make things 
absolutely clear.


Having either spelling in one of these alternatives as appropriate would 
likely satisfy any dissenters and make both the full and abbreviated 
name searchable.


Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 12:58 PM, Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca wrote:
The word is definitely Saint. St is a contraction and neither proper 
English or French. It has the same Latin roots as sanctification and 
similar words.


Similarly Av is a contraction for Avenue and not a word.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbreviation



On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:42, Jarek Piórkowski > wrote:



Hi all,

A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
Canadian English city names should not be expanded.

I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
like to ask people's opinions.

My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
"Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
for some parts of the road every now and then.

As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
an abbreviation.

Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.

Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the 
lines of:

"Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?

(I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)

As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
"St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
"St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
[2] 
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf

[3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
[4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
[5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
[6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
[7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca]

The word is definitely Saint. St is a contraction and neither proper English or 
French. It has the same Latin roots as sanctification and similar words. 

Similarly Av is a contraction for Avenue and not a word. 


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbreviation



> On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:42, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
> Canadian English city names should not be expanded.
> 
> I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
> like to ask people's opinions.
> 
> My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
> could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
> or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
> Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
> like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
> Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
> "Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
> for some parts of the road every now and then.
> 
> As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
> name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
> an abbreviation.
> 
> Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
> to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
> acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.
> 
> Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the lines of:
> "Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
> should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?
> 
> (I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
> focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
> don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
> to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
> and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)
> 
> As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
> be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
> for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
> "St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
> "St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
> Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
> Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
> suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
> used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)
> 
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
> [2] https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf
> [3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
> [4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
> [5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
> [6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
> [7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi
> 
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
> 
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Kevin Farrugia]

Hi Jarek,

I agree that of the sign has a short form for saint then it should be that
way on the map too, as the sign text comes from the official records of
street names.

I think St. Is better with a period as it makes it less ambiguous to it
being an abbreviation and it may help screen readers or spoken directions
in maps provide the right information.

---
Kevin F


On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 12:44 PM Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
> Canadian English city names should not be expanded.
>
> I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
> like to ask people's opinions.
>
> My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
> could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
> or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
> Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
> like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
> Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
> "Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
> for some parts of the road every now and then.
>
> As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
> name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
> an abbreviation.
>
> Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
> to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
> acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.
>
> Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the lines
> of:
> "Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
> should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?
>
> (I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
> focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
> don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
> to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
> and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)
>
> As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
> be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
> for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
> "St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
> "St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
> Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
> Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
> suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
> used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
> [2]
> https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf
> [3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
> [4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
> [5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
> [6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
> [7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[Jarek Piórkowski]

Hi all,

A couple of months back we established a consensus [1] that "St." in
Canadian English city names should not be expanded.

I have been thinking of having the same for street names, and would
like to ask people's opinions.

My main motivation is St. Clair Avenue in Toronto. Every city source I
could find and every street sign I saw in Mapillary says "St. Clair"
or "St Clair". The TTC stations and routes are consistently "St
Clair". The City uses "St. Clair Avenue West" in official documents
like [2]. Geobase in Toronto has "St Clair Avenue West" , "St Clarens
Avenue", and "St Helens Avenue". Currently most of the street is named
"Saint Clair Avenue West/East" in OpenStreetMap, but this is changed
for some parts of the road every now and then.

As a local mapper I would say that "St. Clair Avenue West" is the full
name. Unlike with "Av", "Ave", "W", the "St" in "St Clair" is IMO not
an abbreviation.

Across the Golden Horseshoe names starting with "St. " or "St " seem
to be a bit more common [3] than "Saint" [4], I gather the
acronym-expanders have not looked as much outside of Toronto.

Would we have Ontario community consensus for a statement along the lines of:
"Where "St." or "St" is normally used in the full street name, it
should not be expanded to "Saint" even if pronounced so"?

(I don't know what the naming conventions are in other provinces, so I
focus on Ontario for now. Apologies for being Ontario-centric, but I
don't know of a better venue that is Ontario-specific. I'll post links
to this message in wiki talk pages for Ontario, WikiProject_Canada,
and Canadian_tagging_guidelines.)

As part of my checks I also looked at London UK, which I gather might
be the most-intensively-mapped English-speaking city. (Recommendations
for better-mapped English-speaking cities welcome). Searching for
"St." in road names [5], it has street names for bigger streets like
"St. John Street" and "St. Pancras Way"; [6] has name="St. Paul's
Road" + not:name="Saint Paul's Road" and has had so for 5 years.
Compare with searching for "Saint" [7] which also has some hits,
suggesting that both can be valid depending on what is signed and
used. (Or maybe it's just inconsistent.)

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Municipality_Names
[2] https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-92339.pdf
[3] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1M
[4] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/H1P
[5] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPh
[6] https://osm.org/way/230843467
[7] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/GPi

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Andrew Lester]

I disagree. Silence won't solve anything. 

I'm speaking here as a local BC mapper, and I strongly disagree with these 
recent imports. I thought we had a general consensus that we'd discuss this as 
a community and figure things out before restarting the import, but it seems 
that some mappers don't like having to wait or deal with other people. 
Considering that Danny seems to consider orthogonal buildings to be outright 
wrong (a position that I strongly disagree with and I think some others do 
too), there's clearly still some discussion required before imports can be 
started again. Sure, you could go ahead and import anyway contrary to other 
community members' wishes, but that sure won't make you any friends and you run 
the risk of having your changesets reverted if the data quality is too poor or 
violates the import guidelines. 

Please, please, please, let's hammer things out first before we import any of 
this data. The buildings aren't going anywhere, so there's no need to rush poor 
data into the database. If you're itching to map some things, go for a walk and 
map some addresses and businesses near you. 

Andrew 
Victoria, BC, Canada 



From: "Danny McDonald"  
To: "talk-ca"  
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 8:48:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import 

OK, so this discussion has gone a bit off the rails. In terms of the DWG, this 
has all happened so fast - the referral to the DWG was less than 2 hours after 
the initial message, and was not in response to any actual edits I made after 
receiving Pierre's stop message. 
I suggest that we all stop emailing this list for the rest of the day, given 
the high level of tension on both sides. I will not be importing anything for 
the next week (at the very least), and I don't think anyone else will either. 
DannyMcD 

___ 
Talk-ca mailing list 
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca 
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 15.03.19 16:23, Danny McDonald wrote:
> I think many people on this list fundamentally misunderstand the way OSM
> operates.  Most OSM contributions are made by individuals who see a
> gap/mistake in the data and fix it. 

True!

> It is not a "community process"
> where contributions are made by a group of "local mappers" (although
> this sometimes happens).  

True!

As long as we're talking normal, everyday, "manual" mapping. Like, 100
edits a day, or maybe 1000 edits on a good day.

For things that go beyond a little mapping by the individual, we tend to
have processes, e.g. for imports, for automated edits, for organised edits.

The general idea behind the discuss-these-things-first rules is not that
one mapper is better than another, but quite the opposite: One mapper
alone can actually make stupid mistakes or suffer from bad judgement,
something that the larger community can help against.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[John Whelan]

At the end of the day one would hope we are a community.  We are a large 
group with divergent opinions and to be honest there is a great deal of 
interest in non-mappers in this sort of data.


For example building data is being used in Tanzania to work out the 
optimal areas for group solar panels.  It can be used for many other 
things which may not be immediately apparent to a traditional paper 
based mapper.


With both the Stats Can released data and the Microsoft released data 
floating around some data is going to creep in anyway.


At the moment we have Tim taking responsibility for Montreal.

There seems to be a number of divergent views in Toronto so I think they 
should sit down and see if they can come to some sort of agreement.


We have Pierre and Nate who would appear to have different standards of 
what is acceptable to other mappers.  We have at least half a dozen 
mappers who support the import, shown by their imports. I can probably 
find a few more mappers who support the import if it comes to a simple vote.


I would suggest we try to best manage the process.  If that means the 
imported data is verified by another mapper I think that can be arranged.


Cheerio John

Yaro Shkvorets wrote on 2019-03-15 11:22 AM:
As an experienced local Ontario and Quebec mapper I don't see any 
major problems with Stats Can building quality. It's detailed and 
recent, it's the best dataset we could ever possibly get and it's far 
superior to Microsoft quality. Having many buildings with "almost 
square angles" in this dataset is not an issue as vast majority of 
such deviations cannot be seen with a naked eye. Unfortunately any 
orthogonalization algorithms will do more harm than good in such 
cases. Mapping for the Validator, just like mapping for the Renderer 
is a wrong way to map.
Issues were raised, issues were addressed in the import plan. If there 
are any problems with some mappers violating any specific import plan 
rules such issues need to be pointed out so they can adjust their 
workflow.

My 2 cents.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:55 AM Nate Wessel > wrote:


I just reported this to the data working group, in case you
haven't already. Hopefully they will step in!

Cheers,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban
Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 10:30 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:

Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de
DannyMcD_imports. Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.
voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901

There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the
extent that they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to
continue importing, unless a *specific* valid issue is raised.
Please do not contact me again unless you have such an issue.


La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.


Pierre



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca



--
Best Regards,
          Yaro Shkvorets
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


--
Sent from Postbox 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Danny McDonald]

OK, so this discussion has gone a bit off the rails.  In terms of the DWG,
this has all happened so fast - the referral to the DWG was less than 2
hours after the initial message, and was not in response to any actual
edits I made after receiving Pierre's stop message.

I suggest that we all stop emailing this list for the rest of the day,
given the high level of tension on both sides.  I will not be importing
anything for the next week (at the very least), and I don't think anyone
else will either.
DannyMcD
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca]

I certainly agree with that statement ! Importing should be much more rigorous 
and careful, as mistakes or poor execution is costly. 

> On Mar 15, 2019, at 11:29, Nate Wessel  wrote:
> 
> There is a massive difference between making edits without review and 
> importing millions of buildings without review. 
> 
> 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import

[Nate Wessel]

Seriously Danny?

Pierre was the first to suggest the DWG after you replied to him that 
wouldn't engage in further discussion. You only joined this conversation 
after I reported you.


There is a massive difference between making edits without review and 
importing millions of buildings without review.


Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 11:23 AM, Danny McDonald wrote:
By the way, I strongly object to the way Nate immediately went to the 
DWG, instead of attempting to engage in discussion.


I think many people on this list fundamentally misunderstand the way 
OSM operates.  Most OSM contributions are made by individuals who see 
a gap/mistake in the data and fix it.  It is not a "community process" 
where contributions are made by a group of "local mappers" (although 
this sometimes happens).


The great strength of OSM (relative to Google Maps), is that you can 
make edits immediately without going through a peer review process.  
Some people on this list seem to want to impose a peer review process 
on OSM (at least for imports, for now), because they think they know 
better, and should be given power because of it.


DannyMcD

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] Building Import

[Danny McDonald]

By the way, I strongly object to the way Nate immediately went to the DWG,
instead of attempting to engage in discussion.

I think many people on this list fundamentally misunderstand the way OSM
operates.  Most OSM contributions are made by individuals who see a
gap/mistake in the data and fix it.  It is not a "community process" where
contributions are made by a group of "local mappers" (although this
sometimes happens).

The great strength of OSM (relative to Google Maps), is that you can make
edits immediately without going through a peer review process.  Some people
on this list seem to want to impose a peer review process on OSM (at least
for imports, for now), because they think they know better, and should be
given power because of it.

DannyMcD
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[Yaro Shkvorets]

As an experienced local Ontario and Quebec mapper I don't see any major
problems with Stats Can building quality. It's detailed and recent, it's
the best dataset we could ever possibly get and it's far superior to
Microsoft quality. Having many buildings with "almost square angles" in
this dataset is not an issue as vast majority of such deviations cannot be
seen with a naked eye. Unfortunately any orthogonalization algorithms will
do more harm than good in such cases. Mapping for the Validator, just like
mapping for the Renderer is a wrong way to map.
Issues were raised, issues were addressed in the import plan. If there are
any problems with some mappers violating any specific import plan rules
such issues need to be pointed out so they can adjust their workflow.
My 2 cents.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:55 AM Nate Wessel  wrote:

> I just reported this to the data working group, in case you haven't
> already. Hopefully they will step in!
>
> Cheers,
> Nate Wessel
> Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
> NateWessel.com 
>
> On 3/15/19 10:30 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:
>
> Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de DannyMcD_imports.
> Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.
> voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901
>
> There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the extent
> that they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to continue
> importing, unless a *specific* valid issue is raised. Please do not contact
> me again unless you have such an issue.
>
> La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.
>
>
> Pierre
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>


-- 
Best Regards,
  Yaro Shkvorets
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] Building Import

[Danny McDonald]

As previously noted, I will continue importing, unless I hear a specific
valid concern.  I will wait a week before re-starting, to allow time for
concerns to be raised.  To address some existing concerns:
- Making buildings orthogonal isn't an improvement, it is degrading correct
footprints for no good reason.
- I don't think mapping a large block of connected buildings as a single
building is incorrect.  It might be better to split large blocks of
buildings, but this is best done separately from the initial import.

As for local mappers, PierZen is a Quebec mapper, and Nate seems to map
almost exclusively around Cincinnati - I don't think either qualify as a
local mapper for Toronto or BC.
DannyMcD
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[Nate Wessel]

I just reported this to the data working group, in case you haven't 
already. Hopefully they will step in!


Cheers,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 10:30 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:
Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de 
DannyMcD_imports. Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.

voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901

There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the 
extent that they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to 
continue importing, unless a *specific* valid issue is raised. Please 
do not contact me again unless you have such an issue.



La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.


Pierre


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[Nate Wessel]

Given the scale of this illicit import (thanks Pierre for the stats!), I 
would, yes, stick my neck out and say that I oppose this action as a 
Canadian mapper. Contributors who are clearly violating community norms 
about discussion and consensus do not constitute an implicit consensus 
of some local community. In the absence of a healthy local discussion 
about this, I think it's up to us to say that this needs to stop.


The tasking manager for this project should be taken down immediately. 
Whether they strictly need it to continue or not, they are (ab)using it 
and it's clearly helping them continue with an import that is being 
actively disputed.


Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com 

On 3/15/19 8:28 AM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

IMO the huron/hamptonavemapper import is quite clearly in active
disagreement with the import suspension - while I could believe that
one user could overlook clicking on the wiki link in their changeset
messages just once and seeing the bold "on hold", setting up a brand
new similarly named account on February 15, 2019 and immediately
starting to import suggests they know what they're doing. And it's not
like one ultimately _needs_ the tasking manager to insert the data.

The question is what are we going to do about it? Are you going to
speak for Alberta and BC in opposing this import, Nate? That's
defensible but also debatable.

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 21:12, Nate Wessel  wrote:

I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be locked or 
taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop people from importing 
when we don't have consensus is to not make it so easy for them. Indeed, I 
would find it plausible if these people said they didn't even know the import 
was paused - their evidence: that the tasking manager is still active!

Best,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com

On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
the OSM wiki.

I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.

http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
Alberta tasks.

It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
Meetup?)

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:

Wicked lad importing without an import plan?

Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.

Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.

I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, the 
Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan for 
the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import on 
the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to get 
buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  After a 
request from a local group then I think that particular area can proceed.

Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.

Thanks John

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
(most recent 5 days ago)?

I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[Pierre Béland via Talk-ca]

Réponse immédiate avec refus de discussion de la part de DannyMcD_imports. 
Celui-ci indique qu'il prévoit continuer l'import.voir 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901
| 
There was a discussion, issues were raised, the problems (to the extent that 
they existed at all) have been addressed. I plan to continue importing, unless 
a *specific* valid issue is raised. Please do not contact me again unless you 
have such an issue.
 |


La prochaine étape est je pense de contacter le Data Working Group.
 
Pierre 
 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[Pierre Béland via Talk-ca]

Bonjour Jarek
Ce n'est malheureusement pas le seul contributeur qui agit ainsi.  J'estime en 
divisant (Objets/5) que depuis le 1er février, 6 contributeurs ont importé près 
de 1 million de bâtiments. Selon les commentaires, 5 provinces ont été 
couvertes. Cette information est parfois inexacte. Un fichier json des bbox de 
chaque changeset nous fournirait une information plus précise.Voir par exemple 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67725913 
J'ai joint ci-dessous un tableau sommaire et la liste des changesets par 
contributeur.

Nous faisons face à un import massif. Ce ne sont pas des débutants qui font ces 
imports et ces contributeurs doivent justifier leurs actions depuis le début 
février et expliquer la méthode suivie pour corriger les données. 
Je viens juste d'aviser chacun de ces contributeurs de cesser les imports et 
venir en discuter sur la liste.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67725913
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68043362
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68112880
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67956418
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67686901
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68131003

    Imports Statcan depuis le 1er février - Nombre d'objets par 
province

| 
 | OSM Uiid | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |
| Province | 215433 | 1919010 | 5214232 | 5323321 | 9266764 | 9444677 | Total |
| Alberta | 152 033 | 
 | 
 | 474 276 | 
 | 586 403 | 1 212 712 |
| BC | 44 115 | 
 | 
 | 1 833 617 | 
 | 506 552 | 2 384 284 |
| New Brunswick | 389 750 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 389 750 |
| Ontario | 
 | 2 758 | 
 | 
 | 470 608 | 
 | 473 366 |
| Québec | 297 444 | 
 | 110 484 | 753 | 
 | 
 | 408 681 |
| Total | 883 342 | 2 758 | 110 484 | 2 308 646 | 470 608 | 1 092 955 | 4 868 
793 |


Liste des changesets par contributeurUid 215433 Alberta 67665215, 67665288, 
67665341, 67665453, 67665483, 67665545, 67665602, 67665808, 67665875, 67666001, 
67666180, 67669204, 67669252, 67669308, 67669354, 67669452, 67669522, 67669613, 
67670220, 67670247, 67670273, 67670311, 67670349, 67670387, 67670421, 67670458, 
67670536, 67670908, 67670939BC 67508204, 67508256, 67508291, 67508458, 
67508490, 67508513, 67508622, 67508649, 67508697New Brunswick 67507944, 
67508112, 67508134, 67530245, 67530288, 67530337, 67530387, 67530430, 67530474, 
67530523, 67530791, 67530835, 67531044, 67531220, 67531330, 67531597, 67531938, 
67532009, 67532116, 67532730, 67532743, 67569125, 67569223, 67569803, 67569881, 
67569899, 67569919, 67569960, 67602916, 67603189, 67603261, 67603269, 67603307, 
67603335, 67603367, 67603432, 67603554, 67603678, 67603804, 67604023, 67604270, 
67604320, 6779, 67700103, 67700186, 67700343, 67701266, 67701566, 67704840, 
67704865, 67704907, 67705047, 67705069, 67705120, 67705156, 67705204, 67705284, 
67705553, 67705562, 67705602, 67705662, 67705703, 67705762, 67705815, 67705920, 
67705931, 67706273, 67706329, 67706346, 67706464, 67706503, 67706521, 67719310, 
67719682, 67720148, 67720387, 67720605, 67720722, 67720888, 67720980, 67721152, 
67721270, 67723337, 67724221, 67724317, 67724413, 67724441, 67724618, 67724667, 
67724722, 67724746, 67724785, 67724876, 67724959, 67725077, 67725194, 67725830, 
67725849, 67725878, 67725913, 67725961, 67787993Québec 67498534, 67498609, 
67498689, 67498757, 67498912, 67505394, 67505479, 67505545, 67505558, 67505578, 
67505614, 67505972, 67506005, 67506059, 67506089, 67506346, 67506485, 67506686, 
67506719, 67506875, 67506907, 67506934, 67506947, 67506976, 67507006, 67507027, 
67507041, 67507049, 67507068, 67507105, 67507117, 67507136, 67507160, 67507175, 
67507185, 67507195, 67507202, 67507216, 67507260, 67507285, 67507297, 67507312, 
67507320, 67507331, 67507344, 67507355, 67507356, 67507363, 67520439, 67520589, 
67521376, 67521445, 67521517, 67522086, 67522182, 67523774, 67523861, 67523987, 
67524091, 67524121, 67524132, 67524260, 67524661, 67524728, 67524805, 67525070, 
67525203, 67525335, 67525528, 67526340, 67526436, 67526514, 67526916, 67527123, 
67527293, 67527489, 67527970, 67528040, 67528316, 67528511, 67528581, 67528645, 
67528686, 67528728, 67528787, 67528860, 67528901, 67528967, 67529024, 67529042, 
67529077, 67529173, 67529225, 67529262, 67529307, 67529347, 67529374, 67529413
Uid 1919010 Ontario 68042707, 68042895, 68043362, 68043390, 68043779, 68043921, 
68044088
Uid 5214232 Québec 67957273, 67957348, 67957729, 67958923, 67959011, 67986700, 
67986777, 68069537, 68069649, 68078450, 68078523, 68112014, 68112112, 
68112880Uid 5323321 Alberta 66858409, 66858508, 66858697, 66931104, 66931208, 
66931808, 66932459, 66937105, 66944951, 66945388, 66945814, 66945894, 66946017, 
66946173, 66946358, 66960875, 66961117, 66961283, 66961447, 66962026, 66962184, 
66963495, 66963589, 67022393, 67033345, 67033434, 67033507, 67037604, 67037672, 
67037926, 67038133, 67046475, 67046558, 67046687, 67047191, 67047267, 67047343, 
67047419, 67048115, 67048188, 67048931, 67048997, 67049058, 67049627, 67050230, 
67050277, 6705

Re: [Talk-ca] Local groups as part of import plan

[John Whelan]

The problem is defining and contacting a local group.  Once defined then 
they can make the decision.


I've seen as few as two people make a local group decision on an import 
before now although normally it is done over coffee.


Also we get into who is a local mapper.

Many people have an interest in seeing the data imported but I'm under 
the impression only those with a OpenStreetMap userid who have 
contributed count.


Would anyone care to define a local mapper or group?

Thanks John

Jonathan Brown wrote on 2019-03-15 9:46 AM:


Could we get Stats Can to support a few local groups who want to use a 
common framework for a collaborative research project that addresses a 
sustainable development goal outcome (e.g., the OSM fresh security 
challenge https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Food_security and 
https://www.usda.gov/topics/food-and-nutrition/food-security) ?


Jonathan



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


--
Sent from Postbox 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Local groups as part of import plan

[Jonathan Brown]

Could we get Stats Can to support a few local groups who want to use a common 
framework for a collaborative research project that addresses a sustainable 
development goal outcome (e.g., the OSM fresh security challenge 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Food_security and 
https://www.usda.gov/topics/food-and-nutrition/food-security) ? 

Jonathan 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[John Whelan]

If the local mappers in Alberta or BC feel the data quality is not good 
enough then I think it is up to them to take action but I think it 
really is up to the local mapping community and defining them is 
difficult sometimes.  Also remember agreements within the local 
community are not always electronic in nature.


This is not as simple and clear cut as one might like.

Cheerio John

Jarek Piórkowski wrote on 2019-03-15 8:28 AM:

IMO the huron/hamptonavemapper import is quite clearly in active
disagreement with the import suspension - while I could believe that
one user could overlook clicking on the wiki link in their changeset
messages just once and seeing the bold "on hold", setting up a brand
new similarly named account on February 15, 2019 and immediately
starting to import suggests they know what they're doing. And it's not
like one ultimately _needs_ the tasking manager to insert the data.

The question is what are we going to do about it? Are you going to
speak for Alberta and BC in opposing this import, Nate? That's
defensible but also debatable.

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 21:12, Nate Wessel  wrote:

I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be locked or 
taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop people from importing 
when we don't have consensus is to not make it so easy for them. Indeed, I 
would find it plausible if these people said they didn't even know the import 
was paused - their evidence: that the tasking manager is still active!

Best,

Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com

On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:

The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
the OSM wiki.

I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.

http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
Alberta tasks.

It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
Meetup?)

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:

Wicked lad importing without an import plan?

Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.

Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.

I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, the 
Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan for 
the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import on 
the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to get 
buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  After a 
request from a local group then I think that particular area can proceed.

Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.

Thanks John

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:

Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
(most recent 5 days ago)?

I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.

Thanks,
--Jarek

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


--
Sent from Postbox 

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Building import in BC and Quebec

[Jarek Piórkowski]

IMO the huron/hamptonavemapper import is quite clearly in active
disagreement with the import suspension - while I could believe that
one user could overlook clicking on the wiki link in their changeset
messages just once and seeing the bold "on hold", setting up a brand
new similarly named account on February 15, 2019 and immediately
starting to import suggests they know what they're doing. And it's not
like one ultimately _needs_ the tasking manager to insert the data.

The question is what are we going to do about it? Are you going to
speak for Alberta and BC in opposing this import, Nate? That's
defensible but also debatable.

--Jarek

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 21:12, Nate Wessel  wrote:
>
> I would suggest, again, that the tasking manager for this import be locked or 
> taken down if that is not possible. One good way to stop people from 
> importing when we don't have consensus is to not make it so easy for them. 
> Indeed, I would find it plausible if these people said they didn't even know 
> the import was paused - their evidence: that the tasking manager is still 
> active!
>
> Best,
>
> Nate Wessel
> Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
> NateWessel.com
>
> On 3/14/19 7:42 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> The changeset comment messages link to the Stats Canada import plan on
> the OSM wiki.
>
> I missed it but there were also some edits in Alberta. Quebec edits I
> saw were only a couple, outside of Quebec.
>
> http://tasks.osmcanada.ca/project/148 has also been updated, and the
> Alberta tasks.
>
> It does raise the point that with a country this large, with editor
> community this sparse, there are very few ways to enforce or police a
> countrywide consensus, or even arrive at one. Maybe BC mappers like
> the import, square angles or no? (Does anyone go to the Metrotown
> Meetup?)
>
> --Jarek
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 19:36, john whelan  wrote:
>
> Wicked lad importing without an import plan?
>
> Ask him nicely where the import plan for their imports is.
>
> Looks like a new mapper so may not know the rules.
>
> I think currently there are two sets of data that are licensed for import, 
> the Stats Can stuff and the Microsoft stuff.  I haven't seen any import plan 
> for the Microsoft stuff but unfortunately it's probably fairly easy to import 
> on the Stats Can side my feeling is we need to work out who the locals are to 
> get buy in since Canada wide there is no consensus on what is acceptable.  
> After a request from a local group then I think that particular area can 
> proceed.
>
> Quebec I think is being organised by Tim.
>
> Thanks John
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 18:56, Jarek Piórkowski  wrote:
>
> Are people aware that there are buildings being imported by
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/huronavemapper (most recent 12
> hours ago) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamptonavemapper
> (most recent 5 days ago)?
>
> I notice the wiki still says the import is on hold.
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca