I agree that the use of closed software for this is not ideal, though I
think it's far from the most worrying thing about this whole process.
Perhaps that says more about the rest of the process though... I'm glad
we're at least talking about cleaning up the data now!
If anyone is interested, I've documented some open-source code for
cleaning up building geometries for another import:
https://github.com/Nate-Wessel/hamilton-import
Some of the same PostGIS scripts could easily be reused here, especially
the simplification step, which takes account of any shared walls.
Best,
Nate Wessel
Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning
NateWessel.com <http://natewessel.com>
On 3/28/19 10:03 AM, Roman Auriti wrote:
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Buildings where there is no available municipal data
Sent from Galaxy S7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* John Whelan <[email protected]
<mailto:[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]>
<mailto:[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]> <mailto:[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]> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
_______________________________________________
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
