Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Kevin, as a Vermont resident who is planning several canoe and hiking trips to the Adirondacks (with data collection for OSM), I look forward to having this import as context. Especially when exploring the Saint Regis canoe wilderness, which has a few lakes in OSM, but is otherwise pretty devoid

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

On 03/26/2016 02:06 AM, Russ Nelson wrote: Frederik Ramm writes: > I have zero knowledge about the Adirondack[s] I live here. Imagine a park half the size of Austria, with about 130K people living in it, and 200K people visiting it. Give about 30K of those people Internet access. Oh, and

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Frederik Ramm writes: > I have zero knowledge about the Adirondack[s] I live here. Imagine a park half the size of Austria, with about 130K people living in it, and 200K people visiting it. Give about 30K of those people Internet access. Oh, and there are practically no nerds living in the park,

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

On 03/16/2016 06:50 PM, Mike Thompson wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Andy Townsend > wrote: Another question - if not OSM, what maps do hikers in the area use now? Something from the US Forest Service, or something else?

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > > Another question - if not OSM, what maps do hikers in the area use now? > Something from the US Forest Service, or something else? Answering the question for the US in general: 1) National Geographic Trails Illustrated

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

On 03/15/2016 12:28 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: I have zero knowledge about the Adirondack; I just echoed your own words: You said that there are "difficulties inherent in getting changes made by local mappers working independently", and I said if that's the case then the import is not likely to be

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

> On Mar 16, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > > . . . Another question - if not OSM, what maps do hikers in the area use now? > Something from the US Forest Service, or something else? The reason I ask > is that in GB the generally excellent "Ordnance Survey"

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

On 03/16/2016 06:12 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: What I am a bit surprised about is that in the Adirondacks there's relatively little track data in OSM. Sure, New York State is big, but it's not _that_ big. It's roughly twice the size of Scotland and (excluding New York City) about twice the

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Archaeologists leave most of what they find in the ground, because better excavation / extraction methods may be available in the future that may allow them to preserve the artifacts better. Should we be more like archaeologists? Perhaps. We may have known that TIGER 2010 was on its way. That

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

On 15/03/2016 19:00, Nathan Mills wrote: That said, without TIGER, OSM would have been useless (and still would be!) in large swaths of the US. (stating the bleeding obvious) there are divided opinions on this - when exactly this topic has come up previously people have said both "I only

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Personally, I think using TIGER as an example of an import gone wrong is not accurate. Knowing what we know now, things certainly could have been done better. If nothing else, waiting for TIGER 2010 would have been prudent, as the accuracy was much improved. But that wasn't something that was

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Kevin, On 03/15/2016 03:46 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > Since I received only a total of three comments about this idea, one > strongly negative (from Frederik Ramm) My comment was intended to open your eyes to the fact that there's more to a good import than simply putting precise data into OSM

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

I don’t see why your idea should not receive some more consideration. Don’t give up so easily - people may just have missed the message or not had the time to read your proposal when you initially posted it. Why don’t you create a wiki page with what you have using the import guidelines as a

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Ditto to Mike’s comments. I’ve been dealing with the clean up of bad imports, usually TIGER but others too, where ever I map so I think I understand where people like Frederick are coming from. But I also see the reality in the U.S. of huge geographical areas with very few OSM mappers. An all

Re: [Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

I support the careful import of high quality data whose license is compatible with OSM. Those appears to be one of those cases. I believe the existence of high quality data will aid in the recruitment of new mappers and will encourage high quality contributions from those mappers. It is much

[Talk-us] mapRe: (Second attempt) Potential data source: Adirondack Park Freshwater Wetlands

Since I received only a total of three comments about this idea, one strongly negative (from Frederik Ramm) and two only lukewarm in support, I'm forced to conclude that this proposal has no chance of gaining a broad community support. Consider it withdrawn. I find myself somewhat frustrated