On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:12 AM, Nick Hocking [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Well, #2 would be nice but it would be tricky to detect a collision with
an
existing way. Frankly, because the first TIGER import was done, the number
of completely new ways that would be added in a new import would be
I do not think there is anything to gain from the counties that are listed
to not be improved. My county (orange county fl.) is one that was NOT
improved yet, and in QGIS it looks to be unmodified from the original tiger
import. There are not any new tags in the data that would add anything
On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 10:37 +1100, Nick Hocking wrote:
I'm firmly convinced that automatic uploads should only go into areas
where there are NO user edited nodes or ways. Other updates need to be
done manully to avoid data corruption.
You have absolutely shown a number of cases where there was
Ahh but if the tiger data was deleted or modified a comparison to the
original would show that, and that way it can be skipped. So either it
isn't fixed now, or already has been. Either way I think the new import
should default to not disturb the existing edits. Granted even more
checking and
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:37 AM, Nick Hocking [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Again, let's calm down a little bit. Were you around for the last
import? Did you see how I handled data conflicts in that one? Was
there a problem there that needs fixing this time around?
Yes I think there were
If by not disturbing existing edits you include the
overlaying of other data on top of existing ones,
then I completely agree.
Also there are countless non-existant roads crossing
the interstates. These have had to be deleted and I
agree, must never come back.
And yes I agree that any altered
Nick Hocking writes:
Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not erase or be
overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits.
I'm not Dave, but I'm quite sure that 1) he won't be smashing any user
edits, and 2) I don't support the smashing of my edits either. I've
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Russ Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Hocking writes:
Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not erase
or be
overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits.
I'm not Dave, but I'm quite sure that 1) he won't be smashing
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 22:09 +1100, Nick Hocking wrote:
Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not
erase or be overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits.
On my last US trip I've got about 6000 miles of gps tracks. I've only
edited in a few hundred miles of
Again, let's calm down a little bit. Were you around for the last
import? Did you see how I handled data conflicts in that one? Was
there a problem there that needs fixing this time around?
Yes I think there were problems. There have been some diary entries
bemoaning the fact that their edits
I'll try again - last post appreas to have been truncated.
Again, let's calm down a little bit. Were you around for the last
import? Did you see how I handled data conflicts in that one? Was
there a problem there that needs fixing this time around?
Yes I think there were problems. There
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 11:33 -0700, Alan Brown wrote:
Then, decide how if/when it is appropriate to write over the old
TIGER
stuff with new. Or, to merge it somehow.
Be very, very careful here.
Conflation is a difficult thing. I used to work at
Has anyone looked at importing the TIGER 2007 data yet? I was going to
start coding up the conversion utilities to get started. It appears
that this shapefile format may have existing OSM converters out there.
Anyone want to admit to having one? ;)
-- Dave
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 11:10 -0700, Karl Newman wrote:
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone looked at importing the TIGER 2007 data yet? I was
going to
Then, decide how if/when it is appropriate to write over the old TIGER
stuff with new. Or, to merge it somehow.
Be very, very careful here.
Conflation is a difficult thing. I used to work at Tele Atlas, and there was a
major project to conflate Tele Atlas North American data and GDT data
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 11:33 -0700, Alan Brown wrote:
Then, decide how if/when it is appropriate to write over the old
TIGER
stuff with new. Or, to merge it somehow.
Be very, very careful here.
Conflation is a difficult thing. I used to work at Tele Atlas, and
there was a major
16 matches
Mail list logo
