Also buildings which are touching like a shop fronts are just one polygon, but I don't think you'd ever be able to do this too reliably without a survey anyway. Even if there is a small gap between buildings eg a garage and residence sometimes it will join them into a single polygon.
What I feel it does do well is actually identify buildings, I haven't found any false positives, only a few false negatives where a building is hidden under dense tree coverage. On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:52, Andrew Harvey <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 21:20, Simon Poole <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Just as a comment: there is nothing so time consuming as fixing badly >> mapped buildings (essentially drawing them from scratch is nearly always >> faster), I would only import building outlines that are at a quality level >> that you would not want to change them except if the building itself has >> been modified. >> > > I took a look at these building footprints from Microsoft in Sydney, where > we have high resolution aerial imagery with usually pretty good positional > accuracy and orthorectification. > > The MS buildings aren't as good as hand tracing would be, but better than > some of the worst mapping done through the HOT tasking manager building > tracing projects. > > Compared to the DCS aerial imagery the alignment (rotation) is usually a > fair bit off, but "good enough" basic footprints, the shape is just okay, > not great, not terrible. >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
