Hi Sam and all, There's a lot (!!!) of data there, of most interest to me I guess are the mountains, waterways and road structures. I had a (casual) look through those and they seem to make sense.
Mostly the roads match OSM data layer, which is rather spooky - I had to check some areas which I know are too recent to be in Geobase to make sure you hadn't cheated/merged already. Road names are missing though Some of the streams appear to be in a different place to what I have observed with GPS track but that could be down to GPS positioning errors (or not...). All waterways are tagged with 'waterway=river', even if they are very minor. It would be better to tag as the smallest waterway possible and then manually upgrade them to larger types later (or even auto-magically if they have 'river' in the name). Despite being in the mountains there seems to be a lack of 'elevation_point_imperial' or 'elevation_point', even Crowsnest Mountain (the highest peak around at 2785m) is missing. There are only 6 compared to the 28 that 'peakfinder' has in the area, they are also missing the proper names and elevations. As to the other layers, more data than my brain can handle... Simon. _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
