TL;DR 🏎️

Teams are encouraged to favour modern inclusive phrasing both in their communication as well as in any source checked into their repositories. You'll find a table at the end of this text with preferred phrasing to socialize with your team.

Words Matter

We're aligning our development community to favour inclusive phrasing for common technical expressions. There is a table below that outlines the phrases that are being retired along with the preferred alternatives.

During your team scrum, technical meetings, documentation, the code you write, etc. use the inclusive phrasing from the table below. That's it - it really is that easy.

For the curious mind, the Public Service Agency (PSA) has published a guide describing how Words Matter in our daily communication. Its an insightful read and a good reminder to be curious and open minded.

What about the master branch?

The word "master" is not inherently bad or non-inclusive. For example people get a masters degree; become a master of their craft; or master a skill. It's generally when the word "master" is used along side the word "slave" that it becomes non-inclusive.

Some teams choose to use the word main for the default branch of a repo as opposed to the more commonly used master branch. While it's not required or recommended, your team is empowered to do what works for them. If you do rename the master branch consider using main so that we have consistency among the repos within our organization.

Preferred Phrasing

Pro Tip 🤓

This list is not comprehensive. If you're aware of other outdated nomenclature please create an issue (PR preferred) with your suggestion.

Use new bcmaps package function (cded) to get access to CDED datasets

This issue is a kind reminder that your repository has been inactive for 181 days. Some repositories are maintained in accordance with business requirements that infrequently change thus appearing inactive, and some repositories are inactive because they are unmaintained.

To help differentiate products that are unmaintained from products that do not require frequent maintenance, repomountie will open an issue whenever a repository has not been updated in 180 days.

• If this product is being actively maintained, please close this issue.
• If this repository isn't being actively maintained anymore, please archive this repository. Also, for bonus points, please add a dormant or retired life cycle badge.

Thank you for your help ensuring effective governance of our open-source ecosystem!

Assess differences between raw and smoothed outputs

• compare to other DTMs
• model sensitivity for wetland project.

Expert knowledge (Chuck, Brandon, ?), regional ecologist, geomorphs, soils and GIS experts.

Brandon provided great reference: https://file.scirp.org/pdf/JGIS_2017091514590479.pdf

TL;DR

Topics greatly improve the discoverability of repos; please add the short code from the table below to the topics of your repo so that ministries can use GitHub's search to find out what repos belong to them and other visitors can find useful content (and reuse it!).

Why Topic

In short order we'll add our 800th repo. This large number clearly demonstrates the success of using GitHub and our Open Source initiative. This huge success means it's critical that we work to make our content as discoverable as possible. Through discoverability, we promote code reuse across a large decentralized organization like the Government of British Columbia as well as allow ministries to find the repos they own.

What to do

Below is a table of abbreviation a.k.a short codes for each ministry; they're the ones used in all @gov.bc.ca email addresses. Please add the short codes of the ministry or organization that "owns" this repo as a topic.

That's it, you're done!!!

How to use

Once topics are added, you can use them in GitHub's search. For example, enter something like org:bcgov topic:citz to find all the repos that belong to Citizens' Services. You can refine this search by adding key words specific to a subject you're interested in. To learn more about searching through repos check out GitHub's doc on searching.

Pro Tip 🤓

• If your org is not in the list below, or the table contains errors, please create an issue here.

• While you're doing this, add additional topics that would help someone searching for "something". These can be the language used javascript or R; something like opendata or data for data only repos; or any other key words that are useful.

• Add a meaningful description to your repo. This is hugely valuable to people looking through our repositories.

• If your application is live, add the production URL.

Ministry Short Codes

NOTE See an error or omission? Please create an issue here to get it remedied.

Model sensitivity – wetland models test TRIM vs CDED vs eDTM (DF/G/HG)

No Project Lifecycle Badge found in your readme!

Hello! I scanned your readme and could not find a project lifecycle badge. A project lifecycle badge will provide contributors to your project as well as other stakeholders (platform services, executive) insight into the lifecycle of your repository.

What is a Project Lifecycle Badge?

It is a simple image that neatly describes your project's stage in its lifecycle. More information can be found in the project lifecycle badges documentation.

What do I need to do?

I suggest you make a PR into your README.md and add a project lifecycle badge near the top where it is easy for your users to pick it up :). Once it is merged feel free to close this issue. I will not open up a new one :)

Compare areas with known Lidar Data

• Use PEM sites (Eagle Hill, Deception, Aleza Lake, Boundary) to assess DEM outputs
• Use PEM sites to assess the assumption that the training points are “truth”
• Use FAIB data sets (lower mainland) (Sasha N.)

1. Compare i-sat points to TRIM and CEDED for Wetland project (HG) or broader area (?) (Secondary priority)

• extract pts and plot cross crossing. (https://rdrr.io/cran/topoDistance/man/topoProfile.html)

2. Geodetic Points (bcdata catalogue) (GP)

• https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/data/geographic-data-services/georeferencing/vertical-reference-system
• https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/mascot-geodetic-control-monuments-high-precision

Compare the ensemble DTM to current data sources:

1. TRIM at a province levels

• Rough comparison at province wide (simple
• Hot spots

2. TRIM at known problematic areas

• lakes - rmse value (?).
• cross sections/ plot the cross sections. (lakes etc).
• cutblocks/ fires
• highly vegetated areas
• highly variable mountainous areas

3. For Lakes :

• lakes <- read in lakes from bcdata
  calc stats for elevations in lakes in both DEMs.
• Which DEM has a range closer to 0m?
• graph the elevation range of each lake to ID outliers and compare the spread between the two DEMs visually.
• ID lakes with elevations differences outside an acceptable threshold in both DEMs

1. CDED vs TRIM

• TRIM may not be open source. An alternate open source product is the CDED
  which is closely correlated with TRIM.
• Option 1) Run with TRIM, 2) Run with CDED, 3) Run with both. Will running with both cause issues given the high correlated nature of the TRIM and CDED

2. Boundary Edge effect of TRIM.

• currently the TRIM (provincial stitched product) is clipped to the coast boundary at a 100m resolution.
• The individual tiles for the boundaries are not clipped. Would this provide a better product - if we can provide the additional boundary edges.

3. Temporal change

• How did you deal with differences in data types over time (AW30 canopy height vs non canopy height measures?). TRIM is ground (bare earth/ account for canopy) vs surface (isat2 produce). AW30 and GLO canopy measures how are these accounted for changes over time (ie BC changes alot over time) - how to account for the optical nature of AW30 and isat2.

4. Which isat2 product used? (14 m footprint)

5. Why did you not include other global (i.e. STRM).

6. Comparison with Geodetic points show general trend in underestimation compared with TRIM data sources. ~ 20m underestimate. No apparent spatial distribution distribution with errors.

7. Alignment of eDTM is not quite aligned when compared to terrain features on TRIM. Assume this will be rectified in the final product?