I am generally opposed to importation of parcel data at the individual parcel level. This goes _directly_ to the design of OSM with a non-layered data model and the resultant massive increase in rendered data density.However, there is much information in local GIS datastores about subdivision and
On Dec 31, 2012, at 3:21 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 31.12.2012 06:49, Steve Coast wrote:
Therefore I don't see why each
country or state (i.e. Mass. and their own imports) can't have it's
own solution which reflects the cultural realities there.
Your argument
Why does imports mean not crowdsourced, if the crowd determines which
imports are source-able?
Why doesn't public-domain data that the crowd has funded count as
crowdsourced?
No one has been able to provide directly observable verifiable
information about Ptolemy, yet there is still a Wikipedia
On Dec 31, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
My concern about this entire discussion is that the whole import vs community
argument is employed even when there is a community behind an import.
… by people outside that community living on a different continent.
I mean, I wish
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
Why does imports mean not crowdsourced, if the crowd determines which
imports are source-able?
Crowdsourced means that we survey the data indivdually.
Why doesn't public-domain data that the crowd has funded count as
Apparently my last reply was rejected from the Moderation police - and
it was probably a good thing...
Low wage? Low Skilled? Do as little as possible? That's not a good
description of public domain data or how that data came into existence.
There's a lot of good data collected by skilled
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Randal Hale
rjh...@northrivergeographic.com wrote:
Apparently my last reply was rejected from the Moderation police - and it
was probably a good thing...
Low wage? Low Skilled? Do as little as possible? That's not a good
description of public domain data or
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
Why does imports mean not crowdsourced, if the crowd determines which
imports are source-able?
Crowdsourced means that we survey the data indivdually.
Steve Coast writes:
Waze, last time I looked, was 5 times larger than OSM. Today, probably 10.
Nobody ever tells me about Waze.
Today it's hard to convince any consumer they should do so over
google or waze.
Go to anybody who travels through bad cell coverage. Show them OSMAnd
on a Nexus
On Dec 31, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Steve Coast writes:
Waze, last time I looked, was 5 times larger than OSM. Today, probably 10.
Nobody ever tells me about Waze.
You live in upstate New York, dude. :-)
Steve
___
On 12/31/12 9:38 PM, Steve Coast wrote:
On Dec 31, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Steve Coast writes:
Waze, last time I looked, was 5 times larger than OSM. Today, probably 10.
Nobody ever tells me about Waze.
You live in upstate New York, dude. :-)
beyond upstate.
Serge Wroclawski writes:
The result is that the data quality varies *a lot* and no one
should take it (or any data source) as gospel, just as OSM data is
not gospel.
New York State has 62 counties, and only have bad TIGER data in about
8 of them. The rest are frankly, gorgeous.
--
--my
Steve Coast writes:
On Dec 31, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Steve Coast writes:
Waze, last time I looked, was 5 times larger than OSM. Today, probably 10.
Nobody ever tells me about Waze.
You live in upstate New York, dude. :-)
I have a 100Mbps
Richard Welty writes:
On 12/31/12 9:38 PM, Steve Coast wrote:
On Dec 31, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Steve Coast writes:
Waze, last time I looked, was 5 times larger than OSM. Today, probably
10.
Nobody ever tells me about Waze.
You live in
Hi,
* Another is, the threat of importing crappy TIGER ranges is motivating people
to go look at available county data. That is fantastic. So as Ian alluded
to pushing the conversation forward is itself a motivator
The reason why I pushed the building import is that I am worried about
Hi,
On 30.12.2012 04:23, Michael Patrick wrote:
The point being, is that every locale is going to have features (and
combinations of features) to give contest to some user's activity or
use. And for that individual or community of users, if that feature(s)
can't be added or isn't present, the
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 6:15 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
If, on the other hand, these low and high water lines are defined/recorded
elsewhere (probably even in a legally binding form if they are relevant to
some statue), and the only reason you want them in OSM is because you
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
OSM is not data repository, it's a dataset onto itself. Through years
of experience, and trial and error, we have found that importing these
external datasets does not help the project in most cases. Therefore
we
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Jason Remillard
remillard.ja...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com
wrote:
OSM is not data repository, it's a dataset onto itself. Through years
of experience, and trial and error, we have found that
I am very sympathetic to what I sense to be Jason's (and Michael's and
others') frustrations. It's quite clear there are a *very* large number of
imports that have contributed to the body of data that is OSM (Incomplete
list here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Import).
Hopefully,
There sure is a huge amount of imported data in OSM, but I don't see what's
frustrating about distinguishing between useful and not-useful data
imports. What we've been discussing here is what sort of data should be
imported and if it's useful.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Meyer
What's frustrating about distinguishing between useful not useful data
imports is that there isn't much information available on the wiki other
documentation about how to distinguish between the two.
At least, I haven't been able to find much of the good information that's
in the minds of the
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
What's frustrating about distinguishing between useful not useful data
imports is that there isn't much information available on the wiki other
documentation about how to distinguish between the two.
At least, I haven't been
Serge Wroclawski writes:
Steve suggested we need addresses. He didn't ask for a crazy huge
import.
Well, he kinda did. The TIGER data has addresses. The original import
didn't include them. We *could* triple the size of the data in the USA
by creating address ways alongside the TIGER ways.
On Dec 30, 2012, at 9:01 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Serge Wroclawski writes:
Steve suggested we need addresses. He didn't ask for a crazy huge
import.
Well, he kinda did. The TIGER data has addresses. The original import
didn't include them. We *could* triple the size of the
Hi,
On 29.12.2012 03:22, Russ Nelson wrote:
Here in the US where you aren't allowed to trespass on private
property except on certain conditions, these line[s] in some
government database MATTER to mappers and to map users.
But surely there must be something on the ground that tells you where
Hi,
On 29.12.2012 05:38, Russ Nelson wrote:
The moment it makes its way in to OSM it becomes incorrect. There is
*absolutely* no way to improve the data once it's in OSM, so it should not
be in OSM. Period.
That's a great theory, but I don't think many people subscribe to
it.
I
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
OSM is a big tent with room for lots of data and lots of opinions.
You're right Russ, that there are a lot of strong opinions in the
group, and that there's room for everyone's opinion in this matter. At
the same time, when
Frederik Ramm writes:
I think that is more than a theory. Weren't you the one who proposed to
import some kind of park boundaries, years ago, and implement mechanisms
to make the geometry un-changeable - reasoning that any change being
made by mappers could only be for the worse?
Yes,
On 2012-12-29 12:11AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 28.12.2012 22:16, Jason Remillard wrote:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I'd say anything that is observable on the ground
Un-surveyable data is a nuisance for everyone working with OSM data;
except for those mappers which it empowers by telling said mappers
where they are allowed to survey, and probably others.
it disempowers the mapper who works with the data because they have
to simply accept it as a fact if
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 4:00 AM, talk-us-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
But surely there must be something on the ground that tells you where
you can go and where you can't? Else how would people have evaded being
shot in pre-satnav times?
Actually, not. Sometimes there is a a 'No Trespass
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Jason Remillard
remillard.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
The open space layer from
MassGIS was imported several years ago. This has encouraged people to
map out many of the hiking trails.
How do you make the connection from The MassGIS open space layer was
imported to
* Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com [2012-12-28 16:16 -0500]:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I've used parcel data as a layer in JOSM to trace from. It lets me be a
little
Parcel data in and of itself are not inherently bad to have in OSM as long
as they are filtered and modified before adding. For instance an open space
parcel probably isn't that useful because it is not represented in OSM. It
could be broken up into meadow, wood, scrub, forest, etc. Other parcel
Hi Serge,
To answer your questions, consider the following
- Most of the hiking trails in MA were put in over the imported open
space layer.
- Unlike other countries, It is unacceptably risky to go on a hike on
some random trail that might be on private property. You are likely to
find yourself
On 12/28/2012 4:47 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
* Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com [2012-12-28 16:16 -0500]:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I've used parcel data as a layer in
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
The open space layer from
MassGIS was imported several years ago. This has encouraged people to
map out many of the hiking trails.
How do you make the connection from The MassGIS open space layer was
imported to
Hi,
On 28.12.2012 22:16, Jason Remillard wrote:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I'd say anything that is observable on the ground is fine to map. So if
there's a fence around a
Hi Everybody, Frederik
I have been doing the background layer/tracing over technique.
So, Frederik's, says no to all of these parcels types. Not much gray
area in Frederik criteria.
- True conservation land, land that is owned by a private non-profit
or owned by the town that is supposed to be
Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Brian May b...@mapwise.com wrote:
And as Phil said, sometimes it doesn't make sense to follow the
parcel lines exactly, such as if the parcel boundary extends into a
road and it makes more sense to draw the boundary
Nathan Mixter nmix...@gmail.com writes:
For instance an open space parcel probably isn't that useful because
it is not represented in OSM. It could be broken up into meadow, wood,
scrub, forest, etc.
Jason and I are using 'open space' to mean land that is protected from
development with some
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Frederik Ramm writes:
add it, but if it's just a line in some government database then don't -
Here in the US where you aren't allowed to trespass on private
property except on certain conditions, these line[s] in some
Ian Dees writes:
Frederik's point is that you should only map things that other mappers can
verify or improve on. Since you can't verify borders and boundaries or
otherwise make them any better than the government data after they're
imported, they don't belong in OSM.
Anybody can verify
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Ian Dees writes:
Frederik's point is that you should only map things that other mappers
can
verify or improve on. Since you can't verify borders and boundaries or
otherwise make them any better than the government
Ian Dees writes:
The moment it makes its way in to OSM it becomes incorrect. There is
*absolutely* no way to improve the data once it's in OSM, so it should not
be in OSM. Period.
That's a great theory, but I don't think many people subscribe to
it. Of course anybody can improve on imported
So it sounds like what you folks would want is for data where it's
available, some sort of tracing background layer, or else a per object
import where you could load the data in your editor of choice and
manually select how they go in?
Yes ... especially for 'large' imports. Looking at it from a
47 matches
Mail list logo
