Nate, I'll change the project name to reflect that the import is on hold. As a local mapper, if you want to take a lead on the Toronto import that'd be great. I did review some of DannyMcD's edits last night (Mississauga-Brampton-Vaughan) and to be honest was rather disappointed with the quality. It appears Danny chose to import only new buildings (i.e. residential homes mostly), leaving most of the existing hand-traced non-residential building outlines in OSM untouched. That's unfortunate, the dataset offers some really good data and leaving half of it behind makes it more difficult to revisit in the future. In my edits (Markham-Scarborough-East York) I was aiming to replace as many existing geometries with outlines from the import as possible. I think that's what we should be trying to do going forward. Looking forward to your comments and discussion.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 1:07 PM Nate Wessel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just joined the talk-ca list, so please accept my apologies for not > addressing this list earlier. I'm happy to take this thread off the imports > list for now and onto talk-ca until things are ready to begin again. The > next person to reply can please feel free to remove that email if they > agree. > > I've just made a note on the draft import plan wiki page noting that the > import has been stopped: > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Canada_Stats_Canada_Building_Outlines_Import/Plan > > I would really appreciate it if the person with admin access to the > tasking manager projects could please take those offline for the moment, or > perhaps place them in a validation-only mode if that's possible. > > Like I said in my last email, which perhaps didn't make it to the talk-ca > list ( > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2019-January/005886.html) > I'm now proposing that we leave the data that has already been imported and > enter a phase of thorough validation on that data. > > My plan, over the next several days, is to do a general survey of the > quality of the data that has been imported so far and make a list of > systematic issues I see that should be addressed before we can consider > moving forward again. I'll add those comments to the conversation in > talk-ca and on the wiki page (link above), as I feel is appropriate. As I > said before, I'm of the mind that this import did not get adequate review > or approval and did not follow all the import guidelines. I think therefore > we need to take stock, cross the t's, dot the i's, and move this thing back > toward where it needs to be. Step one is a thoroughly documented wiki page > outlining the proposal and responding to everything required in the import > guidelines. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines > > I know there are people excited about this import, and people who are > eager to get back to work bringing buildings in, but I think everyone will > be happier in the end if we take the time to do this right. We don't need > to stop forever - we just need to stop until we get things right. I > sincerely respect the good intentions of everyone involved in this and I > hope we can all work together to make OSM a map known for it's coverage AND > it's quality. > > Best, > Nate Wessel > Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning > NateWessel.com <http://natewessel.com> > > On 1/17/19 9:05 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: > > The thread link is: > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2019-January/005878.html > > SteveA > > -- Best Regards, Yaro Shkvorets
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
