What about identifying differences (deltas) between these data sources and OSM (using some queries), and letting the community make the changes if required?
On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Stefan Keller <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a somehow active member of the OSM community and one of the > founders of the Swiss OSM foundation. > One of my research interests is the combination of OSM data and > external databases (and communities). > Id like to just drop just few comments. > > I've never seen a conversation about a locking feature but I can > hardly imagine that OSM will ever implement such a thing because OSM > is a "doocraty". > > And I'd like to make you aware that the OSM community is very > reluctant to bulk import data - even if its authoritative or quality > proven: See the guidelines [1]. They rather setup separate pages where > mappers can take the "external data" and integrate it by hand into OSM > database. > > One of my ideas is to implement an "OSM alert service" where changes > in OSM are triggering an alert in a separate external database system. > > Note, that there exists no official OSM object id since they want to > be free to reorganize the main database (which currently is a single > master database in the UK). > > Yours, Stefan > > [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import > > > > 2013/5/31 Frederic Julien <[email protected]>: >> Thanks to Eric and others for their input. I'll share my presentation via >> slideshare once completed. >> >> Please continue to share your insights :) >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Frederic >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Eric Wolf <[email protected]> >> To: "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" <[email protected]> >> Cc: Frederic Julien <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" >> <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 10:37 AM >> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] OSM Data Quality >> >> Bob, >> >> Hosting a private OSM is exactly what USGS is doing with the National Map >> Corps: >> >> http://navigator.er.usgs.gov/ >> >> A fundamental problem with a "locking" feature is that it assumes the >> authority that holds the lock is able to produce the highest quality >> data. This is anathema to the spirit of OSM. >> >> -Eric >> >> -=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=- >> Eric B. Wolf 720-334-7734 >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 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 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Geowanking mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org >> _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
