On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Kevin Kenny
wrote:
> With that in hand, I can probably finish up New Jersey this week.
Noo Joisey is done.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
>
> A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
> information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
> ok, and plan to
Just a heads up for everybody-
I'll handle the redactions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas (Collin,
Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Tarrant, Johnson, and Wise Counties)
Thanks,
Andrew Matheny
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Max Erickson wrote:
> I reviewed about 40 ways
I reviewed about 40 ways in New York. Here's an Overpass script for
finding the ways that have not been changed since the redaction:
https://gist.github.com/maxerickson/e02651cce99af983949b91f8d471fb23
The ways are clustered quite a lot.
Max
___
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
>
> A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
> information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
> ok, and plan to
FYI, I reviewed the ways with redacted names in California (all in San Diego
County) and where possible set the names per Tiger 2017 data. In most cases the
names set by chdr matched the Tiger names but there were some exceptions.
There are a roads that did not have names showing in the Tiger
Hi,
On 27.09.2017 21:49, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> That is helpful. Let us know when you have re-executed the analysis and
> posted the results.
http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
information. I've eliminated
Hi,
On 08/27/2017 08:51 PM, Mikel Maron wrote:
> Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot
> checked in DC, and these are expansions of both the street and the
> quadrant ("St NW" -> "Street Northwest"(. Can we fix the script and
> regen the list?
I have modified my
On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
> I don't understand what people mean with 'verifying' objects. We're
> not trying to find factually-incorrect data. The data is legally
> tainted. It's questionable whether looking at the current names
>
> we can find a good workflow for that. I wasn't expecting the community to
>start working on this pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing issues
>later...
Absolutely, let's do this!
Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot checked in
DC, and these are
10 matches
Mail list logo