On Sep 6, 2018, at 4:30 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> 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 government both in Canada and in Africa about how OSM could be useful 
> and it clarified a number of legal issues about importing data.

Then, quite a number of events caused it to go off the rails.  OK, that 
happens; no judgement on my part, I'm far, far happier to try to watch the 
smoke clear and "might I offer to help?"

> > And I'm not boasting, but I did put some effort into the richest set of 
> > potential tags (harvested from our wikis) than I believe anybody else did, 
> > and I don't really have any specific interest in the project, except that 
> > it be a WELL RUN project.  (So I tried very hard to "seed it well"). 
> 
> You mean me getting the recumbent trike out and site inspecting a few hundred 
> buildings and adding tags to them was for nought?  How sad.

John, I'm on your side, the side of OSM having great data while it builds 
communities across Canada, universities, high schools, libraries, etc.  I'm 
happy the project has "stubbed in" (it's certainly "not nothing!") at least 
some data.  Dust off your hands and keep going!  (Is hopefully the attitude I'm 
encouraging you to adopt).

> There is still a gentle movement to gather more data over time, whether we 
> are keeping the current building data up to date is a separate issue.  Stats 
> is still trying to find ways to make building outlines available under their 
> Open Data license.

A 100% separate track for which I wish them the very best of luck.  That may or 
may not be successful, and CAN and SHOULD happen on a parallel track with OSM 
strategies which work.  I'll stand shoulder-to-shoulder with THAT spirit, as it 
is what makes OSM a very powerful OSM.

> The approach used on the pilot to import building outlines manually has been 
> picked up by Microsoft who have been making them available for the USA and I 
> understand Stats were involved with discussions with Microsoft about some 
> technical aspects.

Truly, I'm glad to hear it.  OSM and Microsoft (and now, it turns out, Stats 
Canada) do get symbiotic every once in a while, and we're all the better for it 
as/when it happens.

> The Ottawa pilot was a perfect storm in many ways with many different players 
> involved coming together.  Reproducing it is harder than it first seems.

I get that, so do others.  A "more valuable" aspect to pick up as a shiny coin 
from that is the learning experience that it is.  In QA this is called a "post 
mortem" and is one of the most valuable data chunks for "the next phase" (and 
there always is a next phase).

> What I would like to see is someone pick up doing analysis with R r.org to 
> see if we can build the feedback loops that might help motivate getting the 
> tags populated.

Heh, you could sketch up a wiki to get them started...! :-)  (It's not a bad 
idea, really).

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

Reply via email to