Hi, I'm a CLC importer from Hungary, too.
> Is it possible to use a source key that makes it clear that it’s CLC? Nope. We have to use the source "© EEA, Koppenhága (2009); Készítette a FÖMI a KvVM megbízásából (2009)", because we received the whole data indirectly not from Corine but from FÖMI. FÖMI means ~ Ministry of Environment and Water (in Hungary), they merged the seperated CLC layers (located HERE<http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/clc-2006-vector-data-version-2>) and cut them with the Hungary polygon. We downloaded from their homepage<http://www.kvvm.hu/index.php?pid=9&sid=50&cid=291>. The only restriction is we HAVE TO use the source tag "© EEA, Koppenhága (2009); Készítette a FÖMI a KvVM megbízásából (2009)". > Are the values for CLC:code and CLC:id listed on the wiki? CLC:id not listed, it is unique. CLC:code list is located at this link<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Corine_Land_Cover>at the Tagging section. 2012/11/3 Paul Norman <[email protected]> > Is it possible to use a source key that makes it clear that it’s CLC?**** > > ** ** > > Are the values for CLC:code and CLC:id listed on the wiki?**** > > ** ** > > If CLC:code indicates the landuse type, is there any value to it if it is > duplicating the tagging?**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Balázs Szalkai [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, October 29, 2012 7:45 AM > *To:* Martin Koppenhoefer; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Imports] Hungarian CLC import**** > > ** ** > > Hi,**** > > Here are the properties of an example multipolygon:**** > > ** ** > > <tag k="CLC:code" v="311"/>**** > > <tag k="CLC:id" v="HU-18010"/>**** > > <tag k="CLC:year" v="2006"/>**** > > <tag k="landuse" v="forest"/>**** > > <tag k="source" v="© EEA, Koppenhága (2009); Készítette a FÖMI a KvVM > megbízásából (2009)"/>**** > > <tag k="wood" v="deciduous"/>**** > > <tag k="type" v="multipolygon"/>**** > > ** ** > > "You will also see that people are adjusting their own work to what is > already there (because that's the "standard")"**** > > ** ** > > Well, I'm not sure. My humble experience shows that there are very > thorough mappers who e.g. always add a "source" tag to their additions > (even if it is a survey) and try to be as precise as possible, and there > are people who flood OpenStreetMap with rivers, places, etc. that are about > 70m off from reality; or they make frequent spelling mistakes (I have > corrected lots of them). Your standards really do not depend on what other > people do and how. But this is just my theory.**** > > ** ** > > "you will be surprised how fast this situation might change"**** > > ** ** > > Let's hope the best. A more recent and more detailed Bing would really be > awesome. In the past few months I recorded several tracks with my GPS at a > poorly photographed area, but that was quite a tedious work compared to > finding and tracing them on a satellite imagery.**** > > ** ** > > "Well, if there are no objections from the mappers in your area"**** > > ** ** > > no, there aren't.**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > Imports mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports > >
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
