Fantastic. I'll give the plugin a run, along with some de-noding (is orthogonalization worthwhile in this case?), and check back with folks. And here's the pre-filtered buildings file county-wide (in .shp format still):
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/mont_bld_large.zip Thanks! -B On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Josh Doe wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 9:25 PM, William Morris > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Howdy Folks, > > > > Trying this again, after a hiatus, here is a sample of a few hundred > > buildings from a UVM-SAL land use classification. In this case it's > > for an area just west of D.C. in Montgomery County, MD. I offer it for > > your consideration before I pull the import trigger: > > > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/mont_b_1.osm > > Thanks for sharing. Spatial accuracy is pretty good for an automated > process (worst I saw was 5m, usually more like 1 to 2m), though not as > good as could be done (very laboriously) by hand given the resolution > of the Bing imagery. I'd tend to say this shouldn't be uploaded en > masse, but rather somewhat selectively, but I'll let the locals make > that call. > > There a few issues I see which include: > * Multipolygons aren't tagged with type=multipolygon, and the > building=yes tags should be on the relation, not on the constituent > (inner and outer) ways > * AREA and PERIMETER should not be included as they can be calculated, > and LandCover should not be included unless you can map it to a > sensible (preferably already in use) tag, and since it's all 5 I'm > guessing that's taken care of by building=yes > * Ways are overnoded quite a bit, so run Douglas-Peucker first, > experimenting with epsilon between 1m and 2m > > I've been slowly making improvements to the JOSM conflation plugin, > with one goal being to facilitate the conflation of data like this > with OSM. If you could provide a version of this file before excluding > features which overlap existing OSM features, I'd like to try it out > with the plugin to see if it produces useful results. Even better > would be if you could take a look at the plugin yourself and suggest > what enhancements would make it work for this use case. Note there are > a few changes that aren't in the latest JAR available through JOSM. > > -Josh >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
