Hi all,I got a little more feedback from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list :) and from sending out my message to as many users in canada as i can find... in hopes to get more feedback.
Harry Wood (OSM) made a comment about the discussion vs. the statements, and so, im seeing some great points being discussed :) So here's some more mud i'll through at the wall... see what sticks :0). I have made some arguments... which of course can be defeated with some good facts. :) lets play. 1. .. We use the power of Wiki and community, and go ahead and import the most recent data available, and import all the different types. (the Canadian Geodetic Network<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GeoBase_Import#Geobase:_Canadian_Geodetic_Network> can probably be imported after the water features. .. as for sure there wont be any confusion there.) So for even in the areas that will result in 'ghost lines', we can post on a chart all the areas that need work. .. so say your working in the Toronto or Calgary area. .. those working on it, and can see that they need help, can post it on the chart. . so anyone who is available to help. can jump in there, contact the users to announce that you are helping. .. so it's a coordinated effort. (we've done these charts before, for measuring what roads are done, and level of completeness. This is a much larger scale, but still manageable) Personally, i think that going at it this way, the positives (tonnes more data) far out way the negatives (fixing up and moving other peoples work). ... another positive is that once all the GeoBase data has been imported... as were going along fixing it, where we are there in person, we can also add things like the land use, and where bus stops, and trails, and shops that GeoBase wont have. 2. .. The discussion about the idea that the GeoBase dataset is also maintained, brings me to this conclusion. Well... you know how, for the time being we are using 'relatively crappy' yahoo imagery, and it's only been certain areas that we have had better imagery for? ... yahoo imagery is also (in a sence) a maintained database of aerial imagery.. ... then once the new imagery became available... we see that the place we traced is different than the image.. so we need to go back there and fix it. ... this will be the same thing with GeoBase updates. (and Linz Updates BTW) Well.... what if we (after the 1st big import of everything, and are up-to-date) ... and notifying Geo Base about the import progress. (perhaps as a community we could help push Geo Base to get a bit more updates available? ... or as much as possible. ... if the results can be physically shown to each province, perhaps that along can be motivation to be as up-to-date as possible?? .. Setting a time-line, cut-off date, were any more data available doesn't directly get imported? So even the future updates don't get imported. ... so creating a WMS layer for the new data, and having that available, so we can use it to trace with. (my assumption, if the technical process of identifying current OSM data, and adding the GeoBase ID to it) .. so every piece of GeoBase data, has it's own id attached to it.. ... is NOT technically possible.) I think it is safe to say, that the desire is there for OpenStreetMap to become even better than GeoBase. .. and YES.. it will. For the moments after the last piece of current available data is uploaded. .. and before the next update of Geobase. .. it will :) So the looking at the future sinerio. .. say it's all imported, and we fixed up all the ghost lines... and are all upto date. .. then GeoBase announces that an update for BC roads is available. ... so what now? .. We see that some of this update, has already been done by OSM users. I think that in this case... the ONLY options are to 1 - import it with a 'smart - detecting and adding' script... or to 2- have it as a WMS layer where we can trace over it. ... just as we would flip on the yahoo imagery layer to get a better view. 3- skip it, and try to get GeoBC to start posting their data directly to the largest OpenSource Database on the planet (directly from the survay people who are out there in the field), or try to get them to have it available as a WMS layer, so anyone can use to trace with. I like the idea of tracing, and only importing datasets were we know that the current data either doesn't exist, or is available in a state which is manageable. In this case, although yes it is frustrating for those who contributed data, we do have the people power available to fix it, in an orderly fashion. So anyway... on another note: For those of you who have now been (hopefully) using the (old and outdated) Ibycus topo, you see that there are tonnes of poi's that are included in there. Does anyone know what data set this information came from. .. ie. Campgrounds, schools, churches, libraries. etc. all of which are available on the Ibycus Topo. - I havent yet added the source of those features, but would like too. A tonne of information, Hopefully points can be shot down :) ... Once we get a firm agreement on the process boundaries, i think it's easier to define all the steps to take. (we do have lots so far) .. now to organize it all to manageable chunks. Cheers, Sam Vekemans Across Canada Trails
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
