I was unaware of the TLID bug and the fact that TIGER has changed
their data model although I kind of wondered about this because I
didn't see a TLID attribute in the new TIGER shapefiles. I guess the
new field is LINEARID? So yeah, that makes the tlid tag completely
useless then.
So, I think I'm
Wasn't someone working on importing address data from TIGER? I was under
the impression that may have depended on tiger:tlid tags on objects already
in OSM, but wasn't sure…
On Jul 30, 2012 1:50 AM, Alan grunthos...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 16:21 -0500, Toby Murray wrote:
On 7/30/2012 7:18 AM, David ``Smith'' wrote:
Wasn't someone working on importing address data from TIGER? I was under
the impression that may have depended on tiger:tlid tags on objects
already in OSM, but wasn't sure…
TIGER address data isn't nearly accurate enough to import into OSM.
* Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net [2012-07-29 18:54 -0700]:
[1] When combining ways in JOSM (at least), values for tiger:* tags
are combined with : (colon) as a delimiter, instead of ;
(semi-colon). Why, and should this be changed?
I believe this behavior was intended to make
great idea, have done it manually from time to time when I edit tiger data.
just adding my support after reading pro/con for certain tags. Ideally you
can come up with a default list and users can extend it.
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Some people
Ok well so far I see no opposition to deleting tiger:upload_uuid. I
might go ahead and work on some code for this.
Other than that we have some votes for keeping tiger:county, tiger:zip
and tiger:separated although I personally still have it in for
tiger:separated :)
Any thoughts on
Here's my 2 cents on the mentioned tiger tags, fwiw:
tiger:cfcc - As I understand, its original purpose was to classify
different highway types, but once the appropriate OSM tags [derived in
part from this tag, and then also from whatever other sources,
imagery, personal visit, etc] have been
Personally, I think there should be a tag to differentiate between a
one-way road and half of a divided road; yes, a human can look at the map
and make that determination instantly, but a computer requires some
advanced analysis. (I can imagine some extra-nice rendering could benefit
from this
Hi,
Sorry to be late to chip in.
I would keep CFCC. It's a good tag to have both to be able to generate
statistics (how much of original TIGER class mapping remains intact?)
as well as for reference; I find the CFCC classification is usually
good - even if the mapping onto OSM k/v is sometimes
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 1:21 PM, william skora skorasau...@gmail.com wrote:
Tiger:tlid - Could be removed. I've had newbies ask me at mapping
parties what it means, I haven't been able to answer them. I haven't
seen any use for its inclusion at this point.
FWIW, I strongly support removing
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Some people may not even be aware of this but JOSM silently discards
the created_by tag if it exists on any object you change and upload to
the API. This tag was deemed unnecessary and counterproductive a long
time ago
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
While we're incrementing every single version number of TIGER data, we
should think about expanding the road names, too. Using the prefix and
suffix data already on the majority of the ways makes this pretty
fool-proof, so
On 29 July 2012 23:21, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
While we're incrementing every single version number of TIGER data, we
should think about expanding the road names, too. Using the prefix and
suffix data
At 2012-07-28 00:33, Toby Murray wrote:
What do you think about adding a couple of TIGER tags to be silently
dropped? ...
tiger:separated
tiger:upload_uuid
+1
tiger:separated
I never knew what it was supposed to mean. If it was (as its name suggests)
to indicate a physical separation
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
Some people have been removing some TIGER tags already for a while. My only
concern would be that, if all the TIGER tags are removed from an object, we
should add TIGER05 to the source tag, so as not to
Some people may not even be aware of this but JOSM silently discards
the created_by tag if it exists on any object you change and upload to
the API. This tag was deemed unnecessary and counterproductive a long
time ago and this is just a way of cleaning it out of the database as
people edit. Not
On 7/28/2012 3:33 AM, Toby Murray wrote:
Not
really sure about the zip code tags.
I find the county and zip code tags to be useful at times to tell me
where I'm located when doing Mapdust cleanup. I could probably come up
with some other way to find myself if they weren't there, but it's
I'm all for upload_uuid being removed automatically. As for
tiger:separated, is it possible to remove the tag only if it's set to
no? The 1.4% that are set to something else should probably be
reviewed manually.
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Some
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I'm all for upload_uuid being removed automatically. As for
tiger:separated, is it possible to remove the tag only if it's set to
no? The 1.4% that are set to something else should probably be
reviewed manually.
Might be
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I'm all for upload_uuid being removed automatically. As for
tiger:separated, is it possible to remove the tag only if it's set to
no? The 1.4% that are set
20 matches
Mail list logo
