Frederic, I've mentioned this before (and haven't seen a solution back yet), but a method for organizations to take responsibility for an area and maintain specific items in that area.
I work for the City of Saint Paul. OSM is not of any use to us unless I upload our data. As an example dataset, let's use our Street Centerlines, which we have a lot of time invested in keeping up to date and spatially accurate. We do this by mandate and get paid to do it. If these features are added to OSM, there is no way to maintain (keep them locked up edit wise) for only our staff to adjust. We actually want to become the custodians of this type of data (amoung others) for a particular bounding area, and want others to tell us when the data is incorrect. Until this type of feature control is in place, it's not easy for me to push for OSM adoption at our organization, or others that use our datasets. One thought I had was to host a private OSM service that could be mixed into the open data side in some manner. I'm open to further discussions on this topic, and truthfully I haven't looked back at OSM for over a year now, so something may be in place for this type of usage that I don't know about. Bobb From: Geowanking [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Frederic Julien Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 12:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Geowanking] OSM Data Quality Dear all, I'm working on a presentation and interested to hear your thoughts. What are the top 2-3 changes that could improve OSM data quality? That could be processes, tools, methods, training, peer review, attributes, etc. If this sort of info is available elsewhere let me know. Looking forward to your answers. Many thanks, Frederic
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
