Tom Chance wrote:
I completely agree that the tools aren't there yet, but could they
not have used OSM for their database?
In theory, yes. But there are huge costs to that, too. The effort
required to work with the community, and in particular, through the
tagging minefield. The extra
On 6 May 2011 16:58, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Tom Chance wrote:
I completely agree that the tools aren't there yet, but could they
not have used OSM for their database?
In theory, yes. But there are huge costs to that, too. The effort required
to work with the
Peter Miller wrote:
It does however seem disappointing for them to be duplicating
some a lot of work.
I agree that the OSM data is not perfect however it is good
and could be even better very easily.
AIUI they're not duplicating work. This is a towpath condition project,
not a map the
On 6 May 2011 18:42, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
It does however seem disappointing for them to be duplicating
some a lot of work.
I agree that the OSM data is not perfect however it is good
and could be even better very easily.
AIUI they're not
On 6 May 2011 18:42, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
It does however seem disappointing for them to be duplicating
some a lot of work.
AIUI they're not duplicating work. This is a towpath condition project,
not a map the towpath project. BW already knows
Andy Mabbett wrote:
Perhaps you missed this part of my post (quoting BW):
A pilot project in London is already:
mapping comprehensive data on access points, barriers, facilities
and public transport as well as information on the surface type,
average width and
6 matches
Mail list logo
