On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emac...@gmail.com> wrote: > That doesn't mean it can't be used alongside it. This land ownership > data (assuming it's licensed properly) can be rendered on the same map > as OSM data (there are many examples of using TileMill to mix data > sources in just this way) and if the data is imported into a database, > there can be queries made against the two sets, so it would be > possible to see the land owner for a given POI, for example.
[....] > In addition, much of > the US has duplicate boundaries (places represented by areas, and > nodes), arguments about the definition of spaces, disagreements in the > data between municipal and census data, etc. Wouldn't the latter be precisely an argument as to why we *can't* just mix data sources? If the municipal data is sometimes right, and the census data is sometimes right, then doesn't OSM benefit by having people doing local surveys then taking the best of the municipal data, and the best of the census data, and merging it into a single data source? This idea that we can't improve government surveyed data is so obviously wrong. Importing and then improving upon government surveyed data is in fact *exactly* what we have been successfully doing in the US at least since the TIGER import. Sure, we aren't going to do a good job of putting individual owners of residences in OSM. But I don't think anyone is suggesting that. In fact, one probably useful compromise would be to not even include the property lines between individual residences. But the property lines between right of way and residences or parks or military areas or whatever, are useful, and represent something on-the-ground. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
