No offense to either of you, and mad props to Ian Dees, but there have been a number of people who've been checking the NYC area very mythodically, including Toby Murray, Richard Welty, Paul Norman and myself
I want to be sure that all non-local folks who've been digging in and checking the areas out get thanked. At this point, we have over 45 github issues showing various data issues. I think the local community needs to come together to decide how it wants to proceed with these issues, and with the import as a whole. - Serge On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Alex Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Ian - > > Thanks so much for diving in and doing a thorough a review. I'll dig into > Github tickets in the next week. I've been side tracked with other work > this week. > > > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Ian Dees <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I carved some time today out to review some of the New York City building >> import that have gone in so far. Over the course of 3 hours or so I >> reviewed 17 areas. I picked tasks from around the city in an attempt to >> cover as much of any variation in time and space that these imports >> occurred. >> >> In general, the quality of the dataset is very very good for the amount >> of data it contains. The buildings are squared up, very rarely overlap >> (there was one case of a triangle polygon sitting in the middle of a >> house), and the vast majority of nodes that overlap with the edge of a >> building are joined with the neighboring way [0]. With the exception of >> changesets uploaded early in October [1] the address nodes are merged with >> the buildings when there's a single address for that building. I spot >> checked some addresses against Bing and Google geocoding and they match up >> as expected. >> >> Going forward, I see a bunch of work in checking to make sure that the >> changesets uploaded in October are fixed (mostly address merging to be >> consistent with the rest of the buildings and name expansion in the >> addr:street tag), but the changesets uploaded in December look to be very >> good. The addr:street expansion and address merge problems were solved. >> >> There were some cases where it was obvious that the source data from New >> York City was suspect (almost exclusively multiple address points inside a >> building where one was for a different road), so hopefully we can point >> those out to NYC and have them fixed. >> >> The notes I took along the way are here: >> https://hackpad.com/New-York-City-Buildings-Review-AkvL8ouj5EE >> >> I will be filing tickets for all the individual issues I ran in to on >> github: >> >> https://github.com/osmlab/nycbuildings/issues/created_by/iandees?state=open >> >> Thanks for reading the "summary" of my afternoon :) >> -Ian >> >> [0] There were a dozen or so cases of buildings where there was one node >> that was not joined properly. These were in changesets uploaded early in >> the process. The JOSM validator spotted them and I manually fixed them. >> [1] These should probably be automatically corrected if possible as it's >> time consuming to do manually (although some of the changesets were >> manually fixed by the uploaders after the decision to merge with buildings >> was made) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Imports-us mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Imports-us mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us > >
_______________________________________________ Imports-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us
