Hmm, did I say "more authoritative"? I thought it was something like "more consistent and topologically correct".
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:28:56AM -0400, Gerald A (geraldabli...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Corey Burger <corey.bur...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > <snip > > > 1) start fresh (streets/road-wise), enjoy correct topology and overall > > > consistency for the whole Canada from the start, and correct/add to > > out-of-date data from GeoBase. > > </snip> > > > > Under no circumstances should we be deleting already collected data. > > Correct data is far less important than mappers and deleting data that > > people have already poured a lot of work into is just going to piss > > people off and make them leave the project. > > > I have to agree with this feeling -- having done a bit of work in my local > area, it would more then annoy me if it was all deleted for some supposedly > more "authoritative" work. > > We're looking for the best map, not the map that is the fastest to get up. > Tiger, which contains far more data then Geobase, used a complimentary > approach, IIRC. > > My 2cents, > Gerald > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
