On 25 January 2011 00:57, Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net> wrote: > At 2011-01-24 15:37, Toby Murray wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Andrew Ayre <a...@britishideas.com> >> wrote: >> > Sorry, the village of Summerhaven, which I totally reworked in Sep 2009 >> > is >> > still shown in red: >> > >> > >> > http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=12&lat=32.438&lon=-110.75635&layers=B >> >> I haven't checked every way in the area but it looks like most of >> these aren't TIGER roads to begin with. You created them (version 1) >> then balrog-kun renamed expanded all the street name abbreviations >> (version 2) so they are in version 2 and last touched by balrog-kun >> which is why they are being rendered as red. The TIGER edited map >> isn't really intended for these ways since they aren't originally >> TIGER data. >> >> I guess it would be nice to turn ways that weren't imported from TIGER >> green, regardless of last editor and version number. But only the >> current version of the way is available for inspection while rendering >> so this is kind of hard to do... > > Only objects with tiger:* tags should be candidates for being red. I'd > suggest looking for the tiger:county or tiger:name_base tags, since some > have removed other tiger:* tags but left ones like tiger:cfcc or tiger:zip_* > for reference. > > However, I find another problem. When I split a TIGER-imported way and keep > the tiger:* tags on it, I end up with what looks like a TIGER way, but > isn't. It has tiger:*=* and v=1 (or v=2 if I edited it again). However, the > UID is mine, not balrog-kun or DaveHansenTiger, so filtering for this would > solve the problem as well. > > In summary, I propose to add the following requirements to the existing > filter for turning a feature red: > - Must have tiger:name_base tag
I'd suggest tiger:reviewed=no which is kind of what the tag was for. Also I (balrog-kun) have edited a good amount of data manually, from survey or imagery, at the same time there are a portion of roads where I changed the name twice, generating v=2 and then v=3 because after the first run I found that some more patterns needed manual review because it was impossible to automatically Do The Right Thing in more situations than expected. On the TIGER scale they're both small groups though. It's a pity that the full history dump can't be used easily because that's often the assumption when processing OSM data and it's often recommended on the mailing lists to use changeset tags instead of tags on features. You could for example filter out changesets with bot=yes which would skip all of my road name expanding and possibly more stuff skewing the results. Cheers _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
