Which somehow reminds of the AND data imported to OSM. I am not sure whether AND and TIGER had anything to do with each other but most of the highways from the AND data in India are straight lines, often a couple of hundred metres off the actual road. I have been deleting old tracks and adding new tracks. Just to give you an example, refer the below frame.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.1488&lon=76.4172&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF This road, a curvy mountain road was a straight line even at the highest zoom level with no waypoints whatsoever till 2-3 days ago. I have deleted 3 such roads in the last week and replaced with the new ones. And I know there are thousands more to go. I doubt if roads like these actually add any value, either from a mapping or routing point of view to OSM. Regards, Shalabh On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) < ajrli...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Andy Allan [mailto:gravityst...@gmail.com] wrote: > >Sent: 12 November 2009 2:15 PM > >To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) > >Cc: Ian Dees; OSM Talk; talk...@openstreetmap.org > >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question > > > >> Ian Dees wrote: > >>>Hi everyone, > >>> > >>>I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing > >data > >>>in the form of "Right/Left From Addr" and "Right/Left To Addr" on each > >>>street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to > the > >>>road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a > >>>separate way just for the addressing information. > > > >It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the > >houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed. I'd say > >it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the houses > >(10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier. > >This has precedent already - a couple of areas in the US has Karlsruhe > >schema addressing converted from what is clearly centreline data to > >spread the addresses out on either side: > > > >http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.676517&lon=- > >84.012017&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF > > > >Your point about 3 time the number of ways becomes increasing relevant > >with the decreasing quality of the data you are importing - 3 times > >the headache of fixing dreadful road geometries would be too much! > > > >On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) > ><ajrli...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> I'd let someone else work out if they can transcribe the data to another > >> format once its in OSM, should that be desirable > > > >I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the > >initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up > >later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the last 6 > >months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to > >remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than > >that to import them! > > You make a good point and I certainly wouldn't want to see data imported > that was either difficult to rework or didn't make logical sense. If its > been done before to offset left/right data automagically I too would vote > for that as a preferred import method. > > Cheers Andy R > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
