Serge Wroclawski <[email protected]> writes: > Moving away from discussions of specific imports, I'd like to explore > what people think about a few areas of this discussion: > > 1) When someone says "I want to import X", what should our first response be?
I think your reaction to point out the danger is fair. But, living in an area with a lot of high-quality data that has been imported rather well, I'm not anti-import. But I am in the "imports should be exceedingly well though out" camp. > 2) When someone points out a widespread problem (such as the Salt Lake > City addresses), how do we want to proceed? Some things need automated edits to fix. I would like to see safe frameworks for this in osm svn/git/whatever, and more or less require that the code to be run for fixups be stored as part of the coummunity history. It's clear that things need to be fixed, and the challenge is to make the fixes be net positive. > 3) Is it better to discourage bots and imports (as we do currently) or > better to heavily document bots and set up standardized methods? (and > do people think those methods will be used?) I think most people doing automated imports are doing so because they want to fix something that's broken, and most are patient. If we provide skeleton code and especially a way to see how the fix works before it's really committed, I think most people would be cooperative. In my case, I've thought about several automated edits (and done zero): duplicate nodes at town boundaries in roads due to massgis highway layer. I wrote on talk-us about what I think ought to be done, in terms of outlining a precondition for "two nodes on same place, massgis tags, each the end node in a highway way with massgis tags". Somehow, most of this got fixed, and I don't know if it was part of the general de-dupe rampage or someone doing a more targetted edit. But as far as I can tell it was done right, and a good outcome. In MA, landuse=reservoir is on lots that are really "reservoir protection". They render blue, and I think they should be retagged. Or maybe mapnik and the tagging rules fixed. So I haven't gotten around to this - i have gotten the clue to tread lightly and I've been busy. fuzzy matching on GNIS vs massgis points, and merging them, taking massgis locations, in cases where no human has edited the GNIS points. Bots are another story; that's a long-term running process that does automated edits whenever preconditions are satisfied. Those are scarier than someone grabbing a state extract, running an automated edit, reviewing the results, maybe sharing them for review by others, and choosing to push upload. For imports, I've thought about several, and the common theme is ENOSPARTIME, but the list is parcel data, but not imported because a) I'm not sure what I think is right, and b) I'm not sure what community consensus is. merging updates to massgis highway data, but this is hard importing NHD or masgis hydro importing more massgis rails/trails/etc. importing the towns w/o highway data, but there's a lot of manual merging (e.g. gloucester). This leads to thoughts of writing code to auto-merge, which leads to it not happening due to not enough time. > 4) In the US, what (if any) role should OSM US play in imports? Perhaps helping with the above, and being elder statesmen about advice. So all in all, my level of restraint, but a higher level of spare time, is probably where we want people to be. One thought is that someone wanting to import should probably have done some manual mapping first, to get their head around the norms and community.
pgpYwsak5zSBe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
