On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:27 PM Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote: > I stumbled across this old import: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25649897 > > (There's a few more with source=Ulster County GIS.) > > It contains a ton of so-called building footprints, but in reality these > are all squares, independent of the actual building footprint. Also it > covers only approximately half of existing buildings, and has many > buildings where there's nothing visible on aerial imagery at all. > > To me this looks like a really low-quality data set that should be > removed, at least where objects haven't been touched by mappers since. I > did not see one single house in this import that actually matched the > situation visible on aerial imagery. > > Even if you're a fan of building imports, you would likely agree that > having this data in place will massively complicate any later conflation > of a better data set.
For once, I agree with you about an import! :) I won't say that *none* of them have been touched, because I know that I tweaked https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304844693 when I parked there for a hike on a less-popular route to https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/357593337. (I didn't trace the parking area because the aerials I had at the time were "leaves on" images and I couldn't make it out under the tree cover. Obviously, I didn't get the outline of the trailer quite right, either, according to the latest New York State orthos.) I assure you that I had nothing to do with the original import, and would not have imported that mess! When I discovered the problem independently, I decided to leave well enough alone, because when I spot checked, most of the little squares were at least close to, if not overlapping, actual buildings. I also thought, mistakenly it turns out, that they had street addresses associated with them, which would make them useful for navigation. Instead, they're little boxes, with no other information. Moreover, I've been holding off on taking any action until I could review and decide on a suggestion as to what, if anything, should be done in light of the http://gis.ny.gov/streets/ project. (Address point import has been relatively non-controversial in the past, but I don't have the time to lead an import on that scale, and I haven't been able to spot-check the data quality.) The import has been significantly edited in some of the villages - check out the area near https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304810649#map=19/42.08528/-74.31553 for instance. Please do check that mappers haven't repaired it before doing any sort of mechanical deletion. Aside from the places where it's been improved, it doesn't appear to be adding very much value. _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
