Re: [Talk-ca] A new available source of trail data in the Nanaimo area

2018-05-15 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On May 2, 2018, at 6:17 PM, Doug Hembry wrote: > I wanted to bring to the attention of Vancouver Island mappers a source of > some trail data in the Nanaimo area... After some back-and-forth consultation with the provider of the shapefile (Lynn, VP of the local horse

[Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

2018-01-21 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Hello talk-ca: I'm resurrecting a month-old thread (about bicycling) as my initial post here. I'm a California-based (USA) nearly nine-year veteran of OSM. My wiki user page at https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/User:Stevea shares some details of my mapping, including parks and other

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

2018-01-25 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
> There are many more tasks on the task manager related to buildings if you are > so inclined to add them. Is that the best way to go? or people can check > the task manager for projects in their area of interest? (new tasks can be > easily added to the task manager... just ask!) I sort of

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

2018-01-25 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 25, 2018, at 8:55 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > I'm all for using the wiki, just want to consider the maintenance effort of > keeping the tasking manager in sync with the wiki. If someone wants to do > that, so much the better! Wikis can get stale quickly without

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

2018-01-25 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 25, 2018, at 8:13 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > I'm not who the "movers and shakers" are really. There is nobody really > driving this project that I am aware of (the wiki suggests we should have a > steering committee). Every time I see email sent to the original

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

2018-01-25 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 25, 2018, at 8:30 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > I should mention that there are others in Ottawa working on completing the > buildings. The City import only had urban buildings. Since the city of > Ottawa is the largest rural city in Canada, so much work still to do.

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10

2018-01-25 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 25, 2018, at 12:16 PM, john whelan wrote: > About six years ago I wanted to import the local bus stops but the licences > weren't aligned. It took about five years for the Canadian Federal > Government to first adopt an Open Government license that was open enough

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10

2018-01-26 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
rnia > On Jan 26, 2018, at 2:13 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-25 04:00 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> The other wiki (linked to in the "main" BC2020i wiki's "Inventory of >> Current Building Data Sets" section): >> h

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-26 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 26, 2018, at 6:42 PM, john whelan wrote: > I'm under the impression that Ottawa was the first city to move to the Open > Data 2.0 licence created by Treasury Board. > > I'm also under the impression that it is the only one that has had its > benediction from the

[Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-26 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
The first (municipal) OD table in https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Building_Canada_2020/building_OD_tables now uses green/yellow/red color-coding to better display accurate status in those cells of rows in the "License" and "Completion in OSM" columns. These give a certain "at a

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-26 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 26, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > If we got the Toronto licence approved tomorrow and none of the > municipal licences changed for the better, at this rate we'd have all of > the BC2020 data cleared for use by 2088 … Now, no reason to let optimism wither;

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

2018-01-29 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 29, 2018, at 12:15 PM, john whelan wrote: > ·NRCan is working on a methodology to extract building footprints, > including topographic elevation and height attributes, from LiDAR > Traditionally OSM has not been happy with this sort of thing. The accuracy

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

2018-01-29 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Um, "dyed-in-the-wool." Steve ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

2018-01-29 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 29, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-29 04:37 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> >> OSM is delighted to receive building data in Canada, truly we are. >> (Provided they are high-quality data). I have heard the process o

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 28, 2018, at 2:39 PM, James wrote: > CC Attribution is compatible with explicit permission, so Gatineau and > Montreal may remain on the list. Oh, how I sometimes dislike the word "may!" I know, I know, our good talk-ca dialog intends to help wider understanding

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 project

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
And...you're off and running (better and better). This is a process, everybody. Nobody wants to be slapping anybody around. I like the way we've been polite and patient with each other here. Regards, SteveA > On Jan 28, 2018, at 4:47 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > > Inline

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

2018-02-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 30, 2018, at 7:49 AM, Jonathan Brown wrote: > I don’t mind reviewing the OSM education wiki for lessons learned and > “promising practices” and seeing how it might inform the design of a mapathon > event aligned to the K-12 curricula and postsecondary capstone project

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

2018-02-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Jonathan: (I spell your name correctly this time, sorry about that): > In Ontario, school boards are licensed to use ArcGIS. This is what many > municipal and regional GIS staff us. For the non-GIS experts it is not > user-friendly. I saw this first hand with an outdoor education teacher I was

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

2018-02-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I repeat myself: less buzzword-compliance, please. More embracing of tried-and-true OSM tenets and culture, like front-loaded planning, ongoing, wide-area project management on something with nationwide scope as this, wiki writing/updating both intent and ongoing status, making available

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

2018-02-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Feb 2, 2018, at 5:03 PM, john whelan wrote: > >I repeat myself: less buzzword-compliance, please. More embracing of > >tried-and-true OSM tenets and culture, like front-loaded planning, ongoing, > >wide-area project management on something with nationwide scope as

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
OK, I've redacted Halifax changes. From four to three (municipalities with license now "green.") Steve > On Jan 28, 2018, at 7:39 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2018-01-28 09:16 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> Halifax also looks lik

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:29 AM, john whelan wrote: > > If you map from Bing imagery there is no issue. If you do map from Bing > please use the building_tool plugin in JOSM. We tend to find new mappers > using iD are not very accurate. Thanks, John, that's a helpful

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Smiling here, thank you for wiki-ing fresher status in both wikis! (It's quite doable, yes?). Steve > On Jan 28, 2018, at 3:40 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > Great, seems like we have a list of 3 ok ones: > Ottawa (approved license) > Gatineau + Montreal (explicit approval

[Talk-ca] BC2020 perspectives

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I see so many simultaneous (some unconfused, some confused) efforts in OSM's WikiProject BC2020. Here, I identify what I see from an out-of-Canada yet long-time OSM contributor perspective. While the following must necessarily remain high-level, I do not wish to over-simplify, though it can

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 28, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Jonathan Brown wrote: > If we have a description of the scope of the work involved in updating the > BC2020 OD tables, I don’t mind trying to find some senior students who could > be trained to take on this task for locations in Ontario. It

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:27 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > Steve A, > I suspect nobody fully knows the current status of licences... So I would > agree with the action that you wrote: > every city except for Ottawa rightfully should be removed to end the > confusion, updating both

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-28 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Halifax also looks like it grants explicit permission. Cautiously, I change Halifax to green (and remove strikeout type in Contributors), as I don't think we need LWG to "offer benediction" when the owner of the data grants explicit permission, as this link appears to do. If I'm wrong about

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

2018-01-27 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 26, 2018, at 8:12 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-26 09:56 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> What I did was to "back-populate" the list of "approved" (by whom? when? >> how did these get here?) list of Canadian

Re: [Talk-ca] Preferred phone number format

2018-01-31 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
> • There are additionally ~45 phone numbers that use letters instead of > digits (eg 1-555-GOT-BEER) > • ";" separator is used occasionally to indicate multiple phone > numbers. " ", "," and "/" are also used. > • There are random comments in the phone number field (not sure

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

2018-02-08 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I'd love to see in OSM (with a nod by STATCAN?) a Canadian "model building" (one will do), linked in the wiki. Richly-tagged and well done, to provide a standard to shoot for. To close a small, tight QA loop, as it were. "Here is what we'd like to see more of." Start small, document it.

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

2018-02-06 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Please see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:level SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
> i believe "city of" is redundant as its a classification vs a name. > Would we say "village of maniwaki"? nope. What "we say" and what "OSM tags" can vary slightly. Although with names, "what we say" is a great place to start and very largely correct. This is a topic which can explode

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I smell a harmonization with admin_level...not that there's anything wrong with that. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Feb 12, 2018, at 6:02 PM, Bernie Connors wrote: > I see the use of "City of" as indicating the official name of a municipality > as it is defined in legislation. Here in New Brunswick the Municipalities > Act‎ defines the official names of municipalities. Some opt to

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-16 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Feb 16, 2018, at 7:50 PM, Bill & Kathy Patterson wrote: > It would seem to me that an official place name should take precedence over > OSM protocols. If we expand the abbreviations (or contractions), of St. and > Ste., then are we not altering the

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names (Jarek Piórkowski)

2018-02-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
> On 2018-02-19 05:08 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: >> Have you passed by talk-gb? They have a fair amount of "St" names and >> some authority as to how to do things in OSM. I haven't, but I shall. As I say quite a bit (in our wiki, e.g. California/Railroads), "it's complicated around here."

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names in Ontario

2018-02-18 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
It's good to see that admin_level tags (always 8? they might be 7 if township, that's a chunky topic...) are there. What I mean by "cutting room floor recycling" includes this thought: it couldn't hurt to update/touch-up/fix these after a cursory examination that's they are

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-16 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
at 12:50 PM, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > http://saultstemarie.ca/ > > thats how its written. even on signs to there > > On Feb 16, 2018 3:47 PM, "OSM Volunteer stevea" <stevea...@softworkers.com> > wrote: > On Feb 16, 2018, at 9:41 AM, Matthew D

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-16 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Feb 16, 2018, at 9:41 AM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > St. Catharines, St. Thomas, Sault Ste. Marie I dislike sounding nit-picky, this really is meant as constructive criticism, but let's expand these names so there are no abbreviations. Our wiki

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-16 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I stand corrected, thank you everybody. BTW I do my best not to abbreviate thinks like "DC" for District of Columbia, but I now better understand that "St." in many cases has now truly become the official name, abbreviation included. SteveA ___

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-16 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
We call it TALK-ca for a reason! We call it OPENStreetMap for a reason! Consensus doesn't always come easy! Thanks to everyone for good discussion. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names (Jarek Piórkowski)

2018-02-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I continue to assert that our (OSM's) name=* wiki states these abbreviations should be fully expanded and that official_name=* might hold the abbreviation. In short, "them's the rules" in OSM: part of why I'm pounding so hard on this is that I might get some recognition that OSM does have

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

2018-02-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Thank you, Matthew. As I said, "slavishly follow rules," no, not necessarily. "Understand the issues," yes, through good dialog. I like what I see here, it allows good consensus to emerge, tedious and perhaps even a bit annoying as it may be. :-) SteveA On Feb 19, 2018, at 2:00 PM, Matthew

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names in Ontario

2018-02-26 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Hi Matthew: You do fine work here, yet I have a concern about "Township." I don't know if in Canada, a Township is a bit of an "odd duck" like it is in the USA. In the USA, we have county as admin_level=6, township as admin_level=7 (in about one-third of states) and city/town/village as

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-08-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
ry good or even excellent and well-thought out and discussed, as are developing public_transport OSM data in Canada. We're making a great map. Thank you again for spirited and interesting discussion. SteveA California > On Jul 16, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Damien Riegel wrote: > > On 12 July 2018 at

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-08-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
ed with this and whilst we > > should cater to these foreign tourists I think what is on the signs locally > > will be less confusing to the locals unless of course we get many more > > people streaming in to escape Donald. > > > > Or have I misunderstood some p

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-08-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Ayant embarqué à bord de nombreux trains à Paris (pour choisir l'une des nombreuses villes que j'ai embarquées dans les trains), OSM aux Halles dit "operator=RATP" et "name=RER B". Certains disent que la pure consistance est stupide. Je dis "trouver ce qui fonctionne et rester cohérent".

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-08-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
r d’OSM et continueraient d’atteindre cet objectif. Bonne journée, Etienne Californie > On Aug 12, 2018, at 4:59 PM, James wrote: > > Résumé très facile: Paris ou la france ≠ Le Québec. > Le Québec fait les chose très différente de la France. > > On Sun., Aug. 12, 2018, 8:36 p.m. OSM

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-08-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
probably get confused with this and whilst we > should cater to these foreign tourists I think what is on the signs locally > will be less confusing to the locals unless of course we get many more people > streaming in to escape Donald. > > Or have I misunderstood some poor

Re: [Talk-ca] GitHub app for BC2020i Challenge

2018-09-06 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
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

Re: [Talk-ca] GitHub app for BC2020i Challenge

2018-09-06 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
> 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

Re: [Talk-ca] GitHub app for BC2020i Challenge

2018-09-06 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
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

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-07-10 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Hello Damien: I'm "meh, OK" with an operator=STM value, but I freely say I haven't checked in completely with whomever you mean by "the minority." (I "haven't heard of" any controversy one way or the other, STM or full-name. But that isn't saying much on my part). I watch what's up with

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

2018-07-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jul 12, 2018, at 1:46 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: > Damien's question appears to be about nodes like > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/438843513, which has > name=Berri-UQAM, operator=Société de transport de Montréal. > short_name=STM seems inappropriate here, we could do >

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

2018-01-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 23, 2018, at 5:53 PM, john whelan wrote: > It should have been 60 per hour. Apols. I can probably map at one per five > seconds but new mappers did and will take much longer. The iD figures of > four to twenty buildings per mapathon session are real numbers. OK,

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

2018-01-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I agree that absolute novices unfamiliar with OSM are not what we might call "an ideal candidate," for BC2020i but it certainly has been and can be done. That said, "coming with Java preloaded" is a certain kind of "trigger warning" that "you have to be this tall to ride the ride." That's

[Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

2018-01-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Oops, the bicycle router I wanted to refer to in my previous is http://cycle.travel by Richard Fairhurst (whom I inexplicably confused with Simon Poole). SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

2018-01-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
John Whelan says: > Thoughts? There are obviously "deep thoughts" going on regarding how OSM can document and provide better geo data, routing and maps for Canadian cyclists: my hat is off to the serious "front-loading" going on here and I wish to encourage it so that it may flourish.

Re: [Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

2018-01-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
James wrote: There's also documentation that Ottawa is using(not final thats why its not on the wiki) with example pictures: https://github.com/osmottawa/OSM-Bike-Ottawa-Tagging-Guide/blob/master/README.md There are differences with respect to US bike pathes Thanks for the link to that page,

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 Calgary Challenges and Best Practices

2018-03-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Whoops, put a closing quote on the alias (I truncated an apostrophe at the end of that line). And, of course, press return at the end of commands to the shell (command line interface). After this, you can "go get plugins" and configure them as you like. Now you are off and running JOSM on a

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 Calgary Challenges and Best Practices

2018-03-23 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Tim, I offer you relatively simple steps which work on macOS High Sierra. You might email me off list (if you get stuck), or I'll be brief here. Install Java Runtime Environment or JDK. Current is Version 8 Update 161. This is figure-out-able: not hard, though it has steps and takes

Re: [Talk-ca] Building_Canada_2020

2018-03-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
john whelan writes: > Stats was after things like the number of levels, house number, street > name, is the building commerical, residential, apartment. There are some > 70 or 80 different tags used for buildings in taginfo. At the bit of > Brandon I looked at there were

Re: [Talk-ca] Dartmouthmapmaker

2018-11-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Being as gentle (though not local) as I can be, I continue to assert that our wiki for BC2020 in general and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Building_Canada_2020#The_data_that_could_be_mapped as a specific section IN that wiki (calling attention to these tags, with

Re: [Talk-ca] Stats Canada new building outlines Open Data do we wish to import it?

2018-11-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Nov 2, 2018, at 3:35 PM, Pierre Béland wrote: > La rédaction d' une page wiki pour l'ensemble du Canada peut répondre aux > exigences du groupe Import de OSM. Mais l'organisation doit être > décentralisée. Je conviens qu'il est plus facile de rédiger un "plan d'importation" unique pour

Re: [Talk-ca] Stats Canada new building outlines Open Data do we wish to import it?

2018-11-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Nov 2, 2018, at 3:58 PM, John Whelan wrote: > So to paraphrase your reply. A centralised import plan in the wiki which > says the data is approved for import and should be tackled in chunks of some > sort of region since we are a decentralized organization. Which I think is > similar to

Re: [Talk-ca] Nova Scotia imports, and boundary=land_area

2018-11-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Nov 1, 2018, at 1:53 PM, John Whelan wrote: > Are you confusing the availability of Open Data with an import? No, I am not. > Most imports need plans No, ALL imports need plans. > but just because Open Data is available does not mean the license is > compatible nor that it will be

Re: [Talk-ca] Nova Scotia imports, and boundary=land_area

2018-11-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Nov 1, 2018, at 12:47 PM, Дмитрий Киселев wrote: > Looks like the wiki needs amending to only list open data with the correct > license either separately or a note added to each entry. Mmmm, not "only," an Import Plan is required, too. That can be part of a wiki that describes the project

Re: [Talk-ca] Enablers and Barriers for Voluntary Participation in Crowdsourcing Platforms

2018-11-02 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Nov 2, 2018, at 9:31 AM, John Whelan wrote: > My feeling is OpenStreetMap has two sides. The first is local adding local > knowledge to the map. The other I'll call armchair mapping. When Stats > Canada did the pilot it tapped the local Ottawa mappers who meet physically. Speaking from

Re: [Talk-ca] Open Database of Buildings / Base de données ouvertes sur les immeubles

2018-11-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Additionally, the greater OSM community looks forward to your Import Plan that follows our Import Guidelines ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines ). Regards, SteveA California > On Nov 1, 2018, at 11:22 AM, John Whelan wrote: > > I think on the OSM side we probably need to

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

2018-11-05 Thread 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

Re: [Talk-ca] Exit with name on node *and* destination

2018-11-06 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Nov 6, 2018, at 8:08 AM, Pierre Béland wrote: > Petit test rapide avec Overpass. J'observe que les clés suivantes sont > utilisées > highway=service > service=emergency_access > access=no > exemple https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/19692719 > > La Requête Overpass ci-dessous avec paramètre

Re: [Talk-ca] Exit with name on node *and* destination

2018-11-06 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Between "out meta;" and "out meta qt;" there should be a >; but sometimes this gets mangled. Entre "out meta;" et "out meta qt;" il devrait y avoir un >; mais parfois cela est mutilé. So, I'm choosing to share an "OT share link:" Donc, je choisis de partager un "lien de partage OT:"

Re: [Talk-ca] Hydro Network (inland water) question

2018-09-27 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Heck, all kinds of things are fun to map: bike routes, railways, making sure provincial and TransCanada route relations are all lined up and tagged correctly, bus and public_transport, small details (micro-mapping), like gymnasium/library details and drinking fountain locations in

Re: [Talk-ca] counting buildings - ( 2020 project ) - help please.

2018-09-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Whew, seems like overkill. Try "overpass turbo" (OT) for such queries. Here is a sample, and the query language (OverPass QL) is text-based and OSM-friendly, as it uses the tags you're searching for: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/BQ6 When it dialogs that the query will return a lot of data,

Re: [Talk-ca] counting buildings - ( 2020 project ) - help please.

2018-09-12 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Sep 12, 2018, at 11:06 AM, john whelan wrote: > One of the requirements was to create something that did not require an > Internet connection OK, yet I had no way of knowing that from your post. Though, that is an "interesting" requirement for a crowdsourced, Internet-based map database.

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: BC2020i - update Sept 2018

2018-09-16 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Matthew, I personally thank you for sharing Alessandro's missive with talk-ca (an OSM-based list).However, Alessandro mentions "BC2020i" (and even "BC2020i-2"), initiatives which "used" (or proposed to "use") OSM as a data repository.  Not wishing to rehash history about this yet again, the

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: BC2020i - update Sept 2018

2018-09-17 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Thank you for those clarifications, John. I speak for myself, but I do feel confident that others are learning from what you say and that OSM and all involved can and shall do better. Honestly, I look forward to "better processes" which "make more open data available to OSM" (a worthy goal,

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: BC2020i - update Sept 2018

2018-09-17 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I (rather fully, and without Alessandro's accusatory "troll-like behaviours," wow) addressed Alessandro in an off-list email reply, though I quickly received an "out of the office until September 21" bounce-back. We shall see. One thing I must say here I found unfortunate in Alessandro's post

Re: [Talk-ca] Ongoing Canadian building import needs to be stopped, possibly reverted

2019-01-17 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 17, 2019, at 6:27 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: > When no one is responding, sometimes it is because they are fine with > the message as-is. I read it. I was fine with it. This isn't an > Australian election. I'm not sure about the allusion to Australian elections, so I'll let that pass

Re: [Talk-ca] Ongoing Canadian building import needs to be stopped, possibly reverted

2019-01-17 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
This is redirected (by request of its author) from a thread on the (talk-) imports mailing list at . On Jan 17, 2019, at 4:55 PM, John Whelan wrote: > The import was discussed on talk-ca and in my opinion there was a consensus > of opinion it should go ahead. The data comes from the

Re: [Talk-ca] Ongoing Canadian building import needs to be stopped, possibly reverted

2019-01-17 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
The thread link is: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2019-January/005878.html SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] 2020 building import

2019-01-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 19, 2019, at 1:22 PM, john whelan wrote: > As a point of information the 2020 web page I think was started by Julia and > very heavily edited by Stevea. Sure I did, because it seriously lacked in the technical direction anybody would need to "map going forward" in the project/initiative

Re: [Talk-ca] 2020 building import wiki comment by Nate Wessel

2019-01-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 19, 2019, at 2:01 PM, James wrote: > Is there no one that will analyse the data I've posted here? > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OK83yrPwMW4nefyu-6JsIInu0meK2rW6/view?usp=sharing > or are we just email thread warriors? Well, slow down there, cowboy, it is gigabytes of data and I've

Re: [Talk-ca] 2020 building import wiki comment by Nate Wessel

2019-01-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
with memory options > (Xms, Xmx), or it will crap out at 3.5GB > > On Sat., Jan. 19, 2019, 5:13 p.m. OSM Volunteer stevea > On Jan 19, 2019, at 2:01 PM, James wrote: > > Is there no one that will analyse the data I've posted here? > > https://drive.google.com/file/d

Re: [Talk-ca] (no subject)

2019-01-19 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
On Jan 19, 2019, at 10:48 AM, john whelan wrote: > There was an earlier discussion on talk-ca about how to handle this project. There were MANY. Speaking for myself only, I urged a very cautious, go-slow approach, to edit the data into "improvement / harmony-with-OSM" as much as possible