On Sat, Jan 8, 2000 at 4:20 PM, Katie Filbert <filbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bad imports are bad for the osm. High quality data carefully imported is > helpful. If such high quality data is available for us that is as good or > better than what we can do ourselves, then it's fine not to reinvent the > wheel. Where it's lower quality data than what we can do ourselves, then > let's not use it. [ ... ] > Leaving imports to local mappers is good. They are best able to assess the > quality of the data for that area an care about quality of their local map > data. It also leaves "low hanging fruit" for them. Some areas without > local mappers may take longer to "finish". That is okay.
I have no arguments with this. Consider this: Does importing to an area where there is no thriving OSM community inhibit the creation of that thriving community in future? At SotM, one of our friends suggested that imports are, "okay except road networks. Never import road networks." The suggestion is that building the road network also builds the community. An existing road network inhibits the community. I apologize for not attributing that comment. I've forgotten who said it to me. Or from another point of view. If the local community isn't substantial enough to maintain the imported data and keep it up to date, is it better to not import until the community can maintain it? Why import 2004 data, if it will be unchanged when the 2006 update is published? Does that mean that you should only import once you have such a thriving community and high quality local data that you no longer would benefit substantially from that import? _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
