4 ms·
As an infrequent but repeat contributor to OSM, this is fantastic! While there is an historic bias against automated edits (sometimes for good reasons but I do
by MRPockets 10y ago
As an infrequent but repeat contributor to OSM, this is fantastic! While there is an historic bias against automated edits (sometimes for good reasons but I do often wonder...), automating the tedious parts of mapping is, imho, a very good thing.
That said, I don't see much detail here regarding what happens when a missing building is detected. Does it get automatically added to the map? Or maybe a note is made indicating a building needs to be added? Maybe the building is auto-added but with a FixMe note for manual mappers to examine it for accuracy?
- joshvm 10y agoAutomated building detection isn't exactly novel in remote sensing. People have been doing it for years so they can measure how fast cities develop, monitor inhabited areas after natural disasters and so on. This kind of work is never 100% correct. It usually relies on multi-band imagery so you can figure out what's vegetation and what's roof tile. As far as I know Google does something similar to automate mapping of roads, and then they have a huge team of people cleaning up afterwards. The best solution here (IMO) would be to add a list of potential buildings that should be checked by people either by cross-referencing satellite imagery or by people who actually live in the area.