On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Peter Budny <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andy Allan <[email protected]> writes: > > > Also, I'd advise you to leave TIGER data to one side. A very high > > percentage of major roads in OSM in the US have been edited, many > > multiple times > > What about the minor roads? State Roads are exactly the ones that > aren't major, and there are a lot of them. Most states have at least > several hundred, and a few like Kentucky and Texas have more than 6000. > That's a /minimum/ estimate of 20,000 roads, most of which haven't been > touched because they're in rural areas. > if they haven't been touched what is the advantage to touch them by a bot or other automatic edits? obviously they are either good enough in there current status or no one cares about it. there is 0 benefit in automatic edits. taking original tiger 2010 data will be the much better choice for any application > -- > Peter Budny \ > Georgia Tech \ > CS PhD student \ > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
