Thanks for sharing those, Nate. I like using PostGIS and I would be happy to help the community clean geometries. Is there anyone in Calgary on the mailing list?
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:20 AM john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote: > The trade off is if it can be used elsewhere then there is a benefit for > using open source software however if it's only going to be used once here > and we have someone who knows the proprietary software very well the data > that ends up in OSM doesn't really care how it was produced. > > This is more a religious argument. > > Lots of people run OSM applications on Windows and Android both if which > are proprietary ran than on an open source version of Unix. > > Cheerio John > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019, 10:04 AM Roman Auriti, <roman.aur...@gmail.com> > 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 <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Buildings where there is no available municipal data >>> >>> Sent from Galaxy S7 >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* John Whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> >>> *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 <stevea...@softworkers.com> >>> <stevea...@softworkers.com> >>> *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 <keith.a.hart...@gmail.com> >>> <keith.a.hart...@gmail.com> 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 <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> >>> <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> 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 >>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-ca mailing >>> listTalk-ca@openstreetmap.orghttps://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 >>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >>> >>
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
