On 23 February 2012 04:27, probiscus <[email protected]> wrote:
> My primary concern is importing the data in a format which will be easiest > to work with even for new OpenStreetMappers. I don't want to import any more > tags than are necessary, as I have worked with some imported data that in my > opinion have too many tags with incomprehensible data (tiger:separated, > tiger:upload_uuid, tiger:tlid, etc for TIGER and probably better examples in > MassGIS imports around Boston). I tend to believe that these extra tags > simply confuse or slow down the mapping process for users and may even have > a negative affect on the OSM community. I hope the result follows K.I.S.S. > as much as possible. Great! I wholeheartedly agree with this approach. > - My upload test plan is to upload to one of the dev servers and see if it > works. You're fast becoming a hero in my eyes! > I think I can then wait for and watch the watershed appear on the dev > map. Ah, no, that won't work. There's no tile rendering hooked up to any of the dev APIs. Still, it allows other people to check out the results in potlatch / JOSM very easily. > What is the utility of these IDs once the > data is in OSM? Would it be better to just not import ComIDs to begin with? I'd say almost zero utility, following your logic. I don't think it's worth importing these. > Anyway, sorry I can be verbose! Please, don't apologise. OSM would be in a much healthier state - both data and community wise - if everyone who was running an import was following your lead. Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
