Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[John Whelan]

My personal view is if we have a process that follows the rules 
available then at least there is more chance they will be followed and 
edits will not be reversed.


I might note the buildings in Regina have amazing similar outlines to 
the ones made available via the Stats Canada file but I really wouldn't 
like to say they had definitely been imported improperly.


One of the problems with the source=tag is it does get deleted from time 
to time.  Locally we have a mapper who if he adds any sort of detail to 
a highway that has source=CANVEC on it removes the source tag on the 
grounds that not all the information has come from CANVEC.   It does 
make auditing the map more difficult.


In Europe there is considerably more resistance to imports than in 
Canada but strangely enough there is a proposal going through the import 
mailing list currently for importing building outlines from government 
sources in Belgium at the moment so hopefully our proposal will meet 
less resistance than some others.


Cheerio John

OSM Volunteer stevea wrote on 2018-11-05 2:10 PM:

On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:29 AM, keith hartley  wrote:

I saw it was a great job. But you're correct, I have no documentation on how 
they did it. Licence process, wiki ( I feel Steve already yelling at his 
computer)

If you mean me, I'm saddened to hear that others think I "yell."  Rather, my 
motivation is to see that:

1)  High quality (or VERY high quality) data are what get uploaded to OSM,
2)  License terms are compatible with ODbL (I respect how difficult this can 
be, especially with the limited bandwidth of OSM's LWG and the wide variety of 
activities taking place in a very widely geographically dispersed country like 
Canada) and
3)  Communication about these efforts stay within a public realm (or "more public," as in "open source 
based protocols" rather than "secret sauce walkie talkies" hobbled by license agreements, like 
Facebook/Twitter/Instagram and Slack).  Yes, primary among these are talk-ca and imports mailing lists, OSM's wiki 
pages, especially explicit Import Plans and Tasking Manager for projects "approved" by the wider community 
and actually underway.

Right now, with John Whelan's (and others') recent newer thrusts to provide momentum to buildings 
getting entered (and/or improved) on Canada, I'm doing my best to "largely watch" (from 
the sidelines) what is happening right now.  I see no reason to "burn bridges" when I 
don't mean to or need to do that.

And yes, I do know that "you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar."  (No, that 
isn't a slight at calling anybody "flies," rather a saying that means "positive encouragement 
works much better than throwing rocks").

SteveA
California


--
Sent from Postbox 

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

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:29 AM, keith hartley  wrote:
> I saw it was a great job. But you're correct, I have no documentation on how 
> they did it. Licence process, wiki ( I feel Steve already yelling at his 
> computer) 

If you mean me, I'm saddened to hear that others think I "yell."  Rather, my 
motivation is to see that:

1)  High quality (or VERY high quality) data are what get uploaded to OSM,
2)  License terms are compatible with ODbL (I respect how difficult this can 
be, especially with the limited bandwidth of OSM's LWG and the wide variety of 
activities taking place in a very widely geographically dispersed country like 
Canada) and
3)  Communication about these efforts stay within a public realm (or "more 
public," as in "open source based protocols" rather than "secret sauce walkie 
talkies" hobbled by license agreements, like Facebook/Twitter/Instagram and 
Slack).  Yes, primary among these are talk-ca and imports mailing lists, OSM's 
wiki pages, especially explicit Import Plans and Tasking Manager for projects 
"approved" by the wider community and actually underway.

Right now, with John Whelan's (and others') recent newer thrusts to provide 
momentum to buildings getting entered (and/or improved) on Canada, I'm doing my 
best to "largely watch" (from the sidelines) what is happening right now.  I 
see no reason to "burn bridges" when I don't mean to or need to do that.

And yes, I do know that "you catch more flies with honey than you do with 
vinegar."  (No, that isn't a slight at calling anybody "flies," rather a saying 
that means "positive encouragement works much better than throwing rocks").

SteveA
California

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

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[keith hartley]

I saw it was a great job. But you're correct, I have no documentation on
how they did it. Licence process, wiki ( I feel Steve already yelling at
his computer)

On Nov 5, 2018 9:24 AM, "john whelan"  wrote:

>Someone already did Regina!

and that is an issue and why we need to get this lot formalised quickly
before someone starts talking about imports being done without the correct
license.

Cheerio John

On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 at 10:15, keith hartley 
wrote:

> Someone already did Regina!
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018, 9:06 AM James 
>> Saskatchewan has Regina data. That's it.
>>
>> It's totally dependent on cities contributing to the open data effort
>>
>> On Mon., Nov. 5, 2018, 9:21 a.m. keith hartley > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'd love to do more imports - I have a group here that we get together
>>> to do mapping as well as know some locals. Of course we'd add a wiki to the
>>> MB page to show the project ect.  From what I can tell there's no stats can
>>> data for manitoba or sask though!
>>> Keith
>>> ___
>>> 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] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[john whelan]

>Someone already did Regina!

and that is an issue and why we need to get this lot formalised quickly
before someone starts talking about imports being done without the correct
license.

Cheerio John

On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 at 10:15, keith hartley 
wrote:

> Someone already did Regina!
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018, 9:06 AM James 
>> Saskatchewan has Regina data. That's it.
>>
>> It's totally dependent on cities contributing to the open data effort
>>
>> On Mon., Nov. 5, 2018, 9:21 a.m. keith hartley > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'd love to do more imports - I have a group here that we get together
>>> to do mapping as well as know some locals. Of course we'd add a wiki to the
>>> MB page to show the project ect.  From what I can tell there's no stats can
>>> data for manitoba or sask though!
>>> Keith
>>> ___
>>> 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] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[keith hartley]

Someone already did Regina!

On Mon, Nov 5, 2018, 9:06 AM James  Saskatchewan has Regina data. That's it.
>
> It's totally dependent on cities contributing to the open data effort
>
> On Mon., Nov. 5, 2018, 9:21 a.m. keith hartley  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> I'd love to do more imports - I have a group here that we get together to
>> do mapping as well as know some locals. Of course we'd add a wiki to the MB
>> page to show the project ect.  From what I can tell there's no stats can
>> data for manitoba or sask though!
>> Keith
>> ___
>> 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] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[James]

Saskatchewan has Regina data. That's it.

It's totally dependent on cities contributing to the open data effort

On Mon., Nov. 5, 2018, 9:21 a.m. keith hartley  Hi all,
> I'd love to do more imports - I have a group here that we get together to
> do mapping as well as know some locals. Of course we'd add a wiki to the MB
> page to show the project ect.  From what I can tell there's no stats can
> data for manitoba or sask though!
> Keith
> ___
> 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] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 129, Issue 15

[keith hartley]

 Hi all,
I'd love to do more imports - I have a group here that we get together to
do mapping as well as know some locals. Of course we'd add a wiki to the MB
page to show the project ect.  From what I can tell there's no stats can
data for manitoba or sask though!
Keith
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca