Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 6:14 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: > > > Given that the *vast* majority of these (with no name) are completely > fictional, and even those that aren't, are so out of position and so > wrongly connected as to render them worse than useless, I believe that

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: > Paul wrote "Or maybe the unedited original TIGER that's still around > dropped to > highway=road. " > > > Given that the *vast* majority of these (with no name) are completely > fictional, and even those that

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 2/25/2018 9:14 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: Paul wrote  "Or maybe the unedited original TIGER that's still around dropped to highway=road.  " Given that the *vast* majority of these (with no name) are completely fictional, and even those that aren't, are so out of position and so wrongly

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

I concur that deleting unnamed and untouched TIGER ways is the way (no pun intended) to go. From my experience editing, many rural driveways mapped in TIGER were converted to highway=service with access=private (though rarely with service=driveway), though there are many more that are still just

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 2/22/18 11:57 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> For the US, however, you'd want to do something other than just >> "downgrading to track".  There are a couple of options I suspect: > In the US, treating an unpaved road as "track" does not seem right. > Besides the surface issue, there is a very strong

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 22/02/2018 16:57, Greg Troxel wrote: For the US, however, you'd want to do something other than just "downgrading to track".  There are a couple of options I suspect: In the US, treating an unpaved road as "track" does not seem right. Besides the surface issue, there is a very strong notion

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

> For the US, however, you'd want to do something other than just > "downgrading to track".  There are a couple of options I suspect: In the US, treating an unpaved road as "track" does not seem right. Besides the surface issue, there is a very strong notion of legal status between a "road"

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Feb 21, 2018 23:29, "Nick Hocking" wrote: I've always been of the opinion that any of the original TIGER data import that has not yet been edited and does not have a name tag, should just be deleted. Then, and only then can the rural areas begin to be mapped

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

I've always been of the opinion that any of the original TIGER data import that has not yet been edited and does not have a name tag, should just be deleted. Then, and only then can the rural areas begin to be mapped correctly. In the early days there were a lot of people who thought that "any

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 19/02/2018 22:03, Clifford Snow wrote:  Can I steal your road styles? Sure. BTW - I can't see the difference between a plain residential and a unpaved residential. Unclassified stands right out, but not residential. That's arguably a bug :)  I added support (downgrading to track) for

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

Andy - I've gotten a small server up with just road names, but lacking other attributes like surface and speed. I'd like to take you up on your offer with help, with help on styling. Can I steal your road styles? BTW - I can't see the difference between a plain residential and a unpaved

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways (Ben Miller)

Chiming in my +1 that county-at-at-time is a good, workable approach for TIGER cleanup. I review the Ito! map's red highways/freeways first, then red major roads, then get to orange. Joe Larson in San Luis Obispo (part of the firefighters there) spent a couple of years coordinating this

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 19/02/2018 15:24, Dave Mansfield wrote: I agree. To me having paved and unpaved show on the osm.org default render would be the biggest improvement to OSM I can think of. If anyone wants any help setting up a server to experiment with options for rendering "unpaved" let me know.  I've

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways On 2018.02.19. 15:28, Richard Fairhurst wrote: ... > Having good paved/unpaved information will be a massive boost for OSM > in comparison to other map providers. We're already partway there. As > an definitely. if somebody with t

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 2018.02.19. 15:28, Richard Fairhurst wrote: ... > Having good paved/unpaved information will be a massive boost for OSM in > comparison to other map providers. We're already partway there. As an definitely. if somebody with the skills reads this, having that reflected on the osm.org default

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

Great to see so much attention being paid to rural TIGER fixup. The majority of my editing these days is that, and it's a massive but rewarding job. I put together a view a while back which superimposes unreviewed rural residentials onto the Strava heatmap. The idea is that you look for

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

Thanks for the suggestions, everyone! On 2018.02.19. 00:07, Clifford Snow wrote: > Running the overpass query looking for user DaveHansenTiger produced > around 30mb of data. There’s definitely plenty of work to do on the DaveHansenTiger ways, but I’d really like to include the bot-mode ways

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 2018.02.19. 00:07, Clifford Snow wrote: > > > I've done a fair amount of TIGER touch-up in Michigan, but there's > still a lot of work left to be done, and this looks like a great way > to get a handle on it. One issue: Due to the automated name > expansion that was done on

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 4:07 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: > > There is another way to tackle the problem, one that I've used as well. > Work on one county at a time. With 83 counties in Michigan the size of each > county should be reasonable for one or two people to tackle.

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

> > > > I've done a fair amount of TIGER touch-up in Michigan, but there's still a > lot of work left to be done, and this looks like a great way to get a > handle on it. One issue: Due to the automated name expansion that was done > on untouched TIGER ways a few years ago (which I think only

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:48 AM Clifford Snow wrote: > Does your state have a problem? Run the following overpass query to find > out: > https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/w74 - just replace "Washington" Need help > creating a Maproulette Challenge - just ask. > I've done a

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: >> I'd also suggest that leaving tiger:reviewed at no is appropriate if you >> haven't been able to travel the road/track in question and determine whether >> it is really an unclassified road or a track, so it remains

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Kevin Broderick wrote: > ... > Downgrading some ways to tracks without doing so to a whole localized > network creates the appearance of a higher level of data accuracy than > actually exists, which IMO is more likely to bite someone in

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

I've been leaving all the TIGER tags and just changing reviewed from no to yes The main reason I've been leaving them is I don't know who might want to make use of that information. -jack -- Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology On February 13, 2018 5:13:16 AM EST, Mark Wagner

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:25:02 -0800 OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: > On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > > Anyway, what is the current best practice dealing with TIGER tags > > once the road has been surveyed and corrected? Remove all

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:11:29 -0800 OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: > Remember, after you review tags and alignment of TIGER data, REMOVE > the tiger:reviewed=no tag, don't change its value to yes. I don't remove the "tiger:reviewed=no" tag unless I've verified the name

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

If you can cover an entire area (which I'd define as a swath between the nearest state highways), I agree that downgrading to track absent other clues is one reasonable solution. One of my key points is that anyone who's spent a fair bit of time trying to use GPS maps (of any origin) in

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

I am very happy to see this rekindled interest in TIGER cleanup! Having done a fair amount of backcountry exploring, I know that there is a wide range of road grades and aerial imagery alone is not enough to decide how navigable a roads is for a particular type of vehicle. Or, for that matter,

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Kevin Broderick wrote: > Please, please, please don't convert rural roads to tracks based on > imagery alone unless it's incredibly clear (and that would exclude anything > with forest cover). > > While many of them should definitely be

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Kevin Broderick wrote: > Please, please, please don't convert rural roads to tracks based on > imagery alone unless it's incredibly clear (and that would exclude anything > with forest cover). > > While many of them should definitely be

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On 2/12/2018 4:25 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: As I am not familiar with the "things you've read," while also wondering myself whether additional TIGER tags (tiger:cfcc, tiger:zip, etc.) should remain or be deleted, I also pose this question to the greater talk-us community. What DO we do

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > Thank you Steve for that ITO link. I was unaware of that and it really is a > nice tool to see the overall status of the TIGER fixup in an area. You are welcome, Tod; I'm happy to share what I know. > I used to simply delete

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 12:11 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea > wrote: > > Clifford Snow wrote >> How many of the TIGER imported streets are still untouched? > > Thanks for rallying us with this great thrust forward, Clifford, with > excellent

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

Clifford Snow wrote > How many of the TIGER imported streets are still untouched? Thanks for rallying us with this great thrust forward, Clifford, with excellent Challenges, resources and direction. I'd like to add one more tool I use for TIGER cleanup, the Ito! map

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

In National Forests, USFS road data usually has sensible information about the suitability of roads for general traffic. There's an imagery layer showing the Forest Service data: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/26099 I prefer opening transformed data as a layer in JOSM. Here's

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

Please, please, please don't convert rural roads to tracks based on imagery alone unless it's incredibly clear (and that would exclude anything with forest cover). While many of them should definitely be unclassified, not residential, downgrading the main rural routes to tracks doesn't match

[Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

How many of the TIGER imported streets are still untouched? Looking at typical urban area with a high number of OSM contributors the your answer might be very few. Seattle for example only has one street left, and unnamed street in the far south of Seattle. King County, just under 6,000 sq km, has