Why is it that FME seems to be a tool that's OK to use for OSM when someone replied that they could use PostGIS and was shut down by someone else replying 'I'm not installing postgesql for you to accept simplification'? Does anyone else find it a little ironic that the community would move forward with proprietary software over open software?
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 7:46 AM Begin Daniel <[email protected]> wrote: > Buildings where there is no available municipal data > > Sent from Galaxy S7 > > ------------------------------ > *From:* John Whelan <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, March 28, 2019 9:32:32 AM > *To:* Begin Daniel > *Cc:* Talk-ca; keith hartley > *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import > > Are you talking about the older CANVEC data or the data that Stats has > released which is really municipal data? > > Thanks John > > Begin Daniel wrote on 2019-03-28 8:31 AM: > > Someone has compared Bing and Canvec data in rural areas? > > Sent from Galaxy S7 > > ------------------------------ > *From:* OSM Volunteer stevea <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 27, 2019 11:52:02 PM > *To:* Talk-ca > *Cc:* keith hartley > *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] Building Import > > Ah, good dialog ensues. Municipality by municipality, in conjunction with > BOTH the StatsCan and Bing data, the right things are getting noticed, the > right things are getting human-realized at what the next steps are to do. > It gets better. > > Yay. Stitch it together. One municipality at a time. One province at a > time. Pretty soon, after a few revisions of data and back-and-forths > between municipalities and province-wide data checking, you've got > something. There, you go. > > SteveA > > > On Mar 27, 2019, at 8:23 PM, keith hartley <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The patchwork of municipalities is at least useful, before we didn't > have a framework for adding this data, but at least we do now thanks to the > umbrella license @ Stats Canada. We're a big country with very few, but > very skilled OSM mappers (IE gecho111 mapped all of regina's building > footprints! ). > > > > I like the concept of the Bing data, but they may have to do another few > tries, or maybe retain their Neural network. - Is there anywhere where the > Bing data looks nice? I found burbs in Winnipeg not bad, but there's some > really weird elements when the source data is too simple (buildings in the > middle of fields) or too complex (urban cores) > > > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:29 AM John Whelan <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > The Stats Canada data comes from the municipalities. Unfortunately > there are over 3,000 in Canada so yes ideally each would be treated > separately in reality each municipality doesn't have a group of skilled OSM > mappers who are capable of setting up an import plan and doing the work > although there is nothing to stop them doing so. > > > > Cheerio John > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing > [email protected]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > -- > Sent from Postbox > <https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach> > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
