On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:58 AM, Andy Allan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Tyler Ritchie <[email protected]> > wrote: >> It would take decades to get any sort of a meaningful map in the US without >> the TIGER import. > > That's a defeatist attitude and not borne out by experiences elsewhere > in the world. > >> Sure, the high population density areas will get mapped >> well and quickly, but not the low density areas. > > As opposed to what happened after the TIGER import, where high > population density areas haven't seen the same level of mapping > activity/quality that we'd hoped for? > > I'm not arguing against using external datasets to help make the map, > but the imports that are a direct substitute of things that are > otherwise easily mappable seem to cause the most problems.
Whether the imports are actually imported or not, people know they're there. I don't think you're going to trick people into not realizing that fact. Yes, the presence of mountains of public domain data in the US is a disincentive to getting out there with a GPS. People don't like to reinvent wheels. But that's going to be true whether the data is actually imported or not. _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
