Why do you want to see outlines autogenerated from aerial imagery, you could just look at the aerial imagery?
Going out and getting the address/use details and then adding that to a building outline, now that's helpful added data that you can't get from automation. On 7 January 2013 03:14, Jeff Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Dave - > > What is the collection date of the imagery used? I couldn't find reference > to it. > > What would be the measure of "relatively" out of date? Outside of newly > developed areas, even imagery that is 5 years old could reasonably be > expected to be ~95% accurate over most of the country. (Based on building > completion estimates). So, isn't much of what's actually on the ground > actually depicted in imagery that's only a few years old? > > Is there measured proof that filled maps are never QA'd? If so, why does > Google offer tools to do just that? If there is no proof, what is the basis > of your hypothesis? > > What would stop OSMers from QAing this type of data collection prior to > inclusion in OSM? > > Why is accuracy the primary measure of concern here? As opposed to, say: > completeness or consistency? > > Would it be that big of a problem if someone mapped somewhere other than > where these building images are, as long as they were mapping? > > Thanks, Jeff > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Dave F. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I understand what & why you're saying this, Nathan, but remember these >> images are all, relatively, out of date. I would rather that gaps were left >> to be filled with what's is actually on the ground rather than what was >> there a few years ago. >> >> I take pride that my city has newest buildings & roads mapped in OSM >> before *any* other mapping service. (I'm still getting around to adding the >> old, been there for centuries, houses) >> >> Having all areas filled with polygons of buildings doesn't actually >> encourage users to refill it with up to date data. More often than not, >> they think because *some* data is mapped it must be correct & go & map >> elsewhere. >> >> Personally I'd rather have (slightly) less, but more accurate data than >> blanket inaccurate data. When I first started ('09) I thought the opposite. >> >> >> >> >> On 07/01/2013 00:50, Nathan Mixter wrote: >> >> I'm not sure if this link has been posted before, but for those wondering >> how Google got their new buildings, there is a link at PC Magazine >> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411232,00.asp. Apparently they >> recently uploaded 25M buildings done through an automated image recognition >> software. >> >> I've manually added most of the buildings in the city of Gilroy ( >> http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/?lon=-121.56369&lat=37.00553&zoom=17) so I >> was curious to find out where they got their data from. I thought maybe the >> city or county had a secret source that I hadn't found. And I checked >> everywhere I could to find buildings that could have been imported. >> >> I was wondering if OSM could do the same thing. Could we buy as a group a >> program like Feature Analyst, eCognition or Imagine Objective and add >> buildings that way? We could combine the buildings with any existing >> address points available. I checked into it earlier this year and one >> program was about $2,000. But the money could be quickly raised. I know I >> would be willing to donate. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing >> [email protected]http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> > > > -- > Jeff Meyer > Global World History Atlas > www.gwhat.org > [email protected] > 206-676-2347 > www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > -- Gregory [email protected] http://www.livingwithdragons.com
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
