On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 3/25/2011 8:37 AM, Ian Dees wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Nathan Edgars II <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> On 3/25/2011 7:49 AM, Ian Dees wrote: >> >> I would say that a better use of our time would be in creating >> boundary >> relations to fix the duplicated county/state boundaries. >> >> I would say it's more important to have the border in the right >> place (at least such that all roads in one state are on the correct >> side). >> >> >> I would disagree. No one is going to use OpenStreetMap to solve border >> disputes in the US. There are higher quality datasets that come from the >> people that make the rules. On the other hand, removing overlapping >> boundary ways will clean up the existing OSM data, make it easier to >> edit and easier to consume. >> > > I'm not sure what to make of this response. Why would you say we have > borders in OSM? Would that reason be better suited by having the borders be > in the correct place but duplicated or by having them in the wrong place but > consolidated? > I don't know why we have borders in OSM. I'm assuming they're in there because people saw the data available and imported it (like I did with the county borders a few years ago -- one of several imports that I wish I could take back). It could also be because it makes for a decent thing to draw on the map at low zoom. I personally don't think borders that are controlled by others belong in OSM but if others insist that the borders are there then I think they should at least be represented with clean OSM data.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
