On 1/6/2013 7:30 AM, Alex Barth wrote:
This could be achieved e. g. by overlaying a light, opaque OSM highway layer
with a contrasting TIGER layer, only exposing TIGER 12 geometry where it
differs from OSM.
Here is a TIGER 12 vs OSM comparison. They cyan inner arc exists in
TIGER 12 but
On 1/6/2013 7:30 AM, Alex Barth wrote:
This could be achieved e. g. by overlaying a light, opaque OSM highway
layer with a contrasting TIGER layer, only exposing TIGER 12 geometry
where it differs from OSM.
Oops, forgot the link:
http://greenvilleopenmap.info/TIGER12vsOSM.jpg
Here is a
These are based off of Lambertus's work here:
http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl
If you have questions or comments about these maps, please feel
free to ask. However, please do not send me private mail. The
odds are, someone else will have the same questions, and by
asking on the talk-us@
On Jan 6, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I've done this before and it works great for ~z10+. Some more processing
needs to be done for the lower zoom levels so that we can display an overview
to make it easier to find problematic areas.
Any particular thoughts on
On Jan 6, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 1/6/2013 11:37 AM, Mike N wrote:
I like the idea of a TIGER 07 vs 12 comparison only being used as a
trigger. If you compare TIGER 12 vs OSM, it will highlight all the
TIGER 07 artifact roads that were removed because they were
It would be awesome to include the land ownership data from BLM especially
if we could do it for the whole US. Unfortunately that is probably not
something that people would want to add because of the conflicts with other
data. I wonder if we could include it on a limited basis or only include
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Nathan Mixter nmix...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be awesome to include the land ownership data from BLM especially
if we could do it for the whole US. Unfortunately that is probably not
something that people would want to add because of the conflicts with other
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote:
On Jan 6, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I've done this before and it works great for ~z10+. Some more processing
needs to be done for the lower zoom levels so that we can display an
overview to make
On Jan 6, 2013, at 4:30 AM, Alex Barth wrote:
On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 1/4/13 1:31 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:
Interesting—how would you characterize bad roads? One characteristic of
crappy TIGER data is road wiggliness, is that what you
On Monday, January 7, 2013, Ian Dees wrote:
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Nathan Mixter
nmix...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nmix...@gmail.com');
wrote:
It would be awesome to include the land ownership data from BLM
especially if we could do it for the whole US. Unfortunately
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Monday, January 7, 2013, Ian Dees wrote:
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Nathan Mixter nmix...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be awesome to include the land ownership data from BLM
especially if we could do it for the
Isn't that true of all data in the database?
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Monday, January 7, 2013, Ian Dees wrote:
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Nathan Mixter nmix...@gmail.com
Some OSM Editors have spent time improving at least county borders.
A core part of the discussion is ownership. If BLM data is added to the
OSM DB, who are the individuals within the community that will take active
ownership for keeping the data quality high and updated as BLM issues
changes, or
On 1/7/13 10:37 PM, the Old Topo Depot wrote:
We do have an issue with US state and county borders, as some are missing,
incorrect, incomplete or incorrectly tagged. Perhaps we can organize a
cleanse the state and county borders project to improve the data quality
and currentness.
i would
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
Isn't that true of all data in the database?
OSM is built on surveyors doing surveys. That is we have people who go
out and walk around with GPSes, or maps, and manually survey what's on
the ground. Then when a second person goes
I know that the TIGER 2012 overlay available in JOSM has been very helpful and
I think that a combination of a) increasing awareness of this overlay and b)
making the overlay available in Potlatch would go a long way toward leveraging
TIGER 2012. In general, I think it is not the geometry
We just had this conversation a couple threads ago. This sort of land
ownership border doesn't really belong in OSM because we can't improve it.
In OSM as a whole, or just in the US? When I peruse the various
hiking/path/trail tagging portions of the Wiki, I found this:
Since the tagging is
My apologies - my real point was that it doesn't seem that rules are being
applied equally across different data sets.
For example, requiring that any data imported into OSM have a lifetime
maintenance plan seems like something that we don't require of *any* OSM
data entry. Most data is entered
Full ack to to what Serge and Ian mentioned already. In addition I checked the
metadata and this data is of questionable accuracy and shouldn't be added alone
for this reason.
Data set now is a mix of scale, tolerances, and vintage, ranging from 1994 to
2006, line work ranging from GCDB to 24K
So there too, is a potential win for OSM. We could rely on current, highly
accurate public domain boundry data and use that for rendering, geolocation
and other places, while keeping it out of the OSM dataset.
Please expand on this. There are already communities around Disaster
Relief, etc.,
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
All of the rules about observability and verifiability apply to country and
state borders, as well, as Mike states, but we include them and somehow
improve them.
Have we improved them? Being the last user to touch about 35% of
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
All of the rules about observability and verifiability apply to country
and
state borders, as well, as Mike states, but we include them and somehow
22 matches
Mail list logo
