On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think that even imports that are well executed *technically* are usually > bad because they worsen the ratio of "mapper hours available to maintain > data" to "amount of data requiring maintenance". > > Imports should only be allowed if there is a realistic expecation that the> > presence of the imported data will lead to a growth in our community of > about the number of people that would have been required to survey the > imported data in the first place. I think in this case, Martijn is reacting to the sheer number of half completed imports and fixbots in the US that have left areas half completed or half-right. It would be easy to say "Manually fix the data", but I can tell you from experience that going around and manually fixing "Rd" to Road is not fun, and can, with the TIGER imports, be done safely (by looking at other tags and being careful with the expansion regex). This has been done for part of the country, but not the other part. Similarly, here in the mid-Atlantic region, we have several imports which have been both not-complete and done twice. I've spent many hours manually examining two polygons of the same geometry (some which share the same nodes, others which do not) only to remove one. Having users do these kind of operations adds nothing but "busywork", and is error prone (in the second case, I've removed both sets of polygons by accident, for example). I think Martijn's focus on cleaning up the imports, especially in the US, should be welcome and encouraged. - Serge _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
