On Feb 2, 2018, at 5:03 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> 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 this, 
> >wiki writing/updating both intent and ongoing status, making available short 
> >video clip "flight plans" (OSM curriculum specific to entering building 
> >data) to explain process to various audiences in Canada....

> The above paragraph seems loaded with buzz words to me.

John:  "tenets, sub-culture, planning, project management, scope, status, video 
clips, explaining process and various audiences" are not buzzwords.  They are 
well-established, hundreds of years old (well, not video clips) and most 
importantly, they work.  Yes, "wiki" is more modern and specific to a project 
like OSM, I stand by that, as BC2020 is an OSM project, we really can't get 
away from that simple truth.

> From a practical point of view I think we have established that there are no 
> open Data sets we can easily import.  We have also cleaned up the wiki.  We 
> have identified a possible source of Open Data building outlines from NRC but 
> they won't be available in a suitable timeframe for a Mapathon in March.

We have cleaned up the wiki, yes, I'd still call it about version 0.7 rather 
than a 1.0.  To get there, I'd like to see (starting with Ottawa experiences?) 
a "seed" built for newcomers in, say, a medium-sized city to clone what was 
done there.  Yes, NOT using OD seems a sort of "stepping around a temporary 
roadblock," but that shouldn't throw too much cold water on future progress in 
BC2020.  (no "i" there, it's a WikiProject).  So:  we have three methods (two 
if we don't count importing OD, which still can happen some fine future day).  
One is manual mapping (using iD is fraught with peril, use JOSM and the 
buildings plugin), the other is "improving" existing building data with 
additional tags based on local knowledge.  Excellent.  But that is not all:  if 
I am a community activist all hot to use OSM to get (better, any, some...) 
building data into OSM for MY city, can I read the wiki and call a meeting at 
the library multi-purpose room for twenty people and get them to put excellent 
building data into OSM?  Mmmmmm, maybe.  But maybe not.  Get the wiki to where 
that can happen, and OSM will begin to consider the wiki much more "1.0."

> We know we have interest in schools but we need to work with them to identify 
> ways they can contribute whilst at the same time learning things of value.

"Learning things of value" can include community building (that's a broad term, 
and an OSM Mapping Party can arguably qualify).  There is much, much more to 
say here.

> If you look at the Ottawa pilot we worked with OSM but we didn't use the way 
> it's always been done in OSM by any means other than gather together to drink 
> coffee.
> 
> Canada does things differently.  We always have.  The advantage we have is 
> there are fewer of us and on occasion we even work together.

Two things:  one, I'm not sure if that was a slight against me as if I don't 
work together with people (in OSM, in USA, in OSM-USA...).  I most certainly do 
and can offer you countless examples.  Second, and more importantly than 
defending myself against possible/perceived rocks being thrown at me as I try 
to help:  Canada, like anywhere on Earth, will of course do things "in its own 
way" in OSM, and that's OK:  buildings in Nepal, and how they get into OSM are 
not buildings in Canada, and how they get into OSM.  However, I think everybody 
will agree that however buildings (or any data) get into OSM, it must be "in 
ways compatible with OSM."  OSM's first name is "Open." That includes 
transparency, good communication, establishing consensus and documenting what 
we intend to do and what we have done.

Really, I think we very much largely agree.  There is still some road to pave, 
sure, but it does get better.

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

Reply via email to