If you can assume that OSM data is 100% correct then you can also assume that data from a city GIS department that have done their jobs correctly is also 100% correct.
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:04 PM, James <[email protected]> wrote: > Rory said: > What if OSM data is wrong? What if OSM says "The river bank goes up to > here" and it doesn't, and that would make the tree in the river. > > Which is a valid point because you are suggesting: > The usual approach would be to automatically analyze the data in > combination with the OSM data to identify the cases with possible > conflicts and then to manually review only those. > > To which I am replying that is an invalid way of validating data because > that would be a presumtion that OSM Data is 100% correct and accurate, > which it is not(aligned to misaligned imagery is an example of why it could > be incorrect). > > Maybe understanding the logic flaw I'm trying to express in your > "analysis" would be a good place to start. > > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Christoph Hormann <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Wednesday 28 June 2017, James wrote: >> > Well that analysis is incorrect in itself as others have stated, OSM >> > can be wrong. So a river bank, building, etc may not be properly >> > drawn. So with that being said what you are saying is the only viable >> > way to accept an import is to manually review every single item in >> > the dataset. >> >> It would not be a bad idea to actually read what i write before claiming >> it means something different than what i said. >> >> -- >> Christoph Hormann >> http://www.imagico.de/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Imports mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports >> > > > > -- > 外に遊びに行こう！ > -- 外に遊びに行こう！
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
