As a relative recent us mapper, I've mapped only a few Sub divisions and they're low on priority list to map. One, I live in the dense city which is more efficient to map (more to map in a small area) and when I go on errands, I can take alternate routes to map that aren't far out of the way. For subdivisions, they tend to be dead ends, only one way in and out. Also, I do a bit of my mapping while biking and roads surrounding sub divisions usually aren't bike friendly. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I also map to explore my city, finding new businesses to try, see great architecture and places. The sub divisions generally don't offer that. On Mar 15, 2012 6:44 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Talk-us digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey > (Hillsman, Edward) > 2. Re: suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey (Mike N) > 3. Re: suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey > (Martijn van Exel) > 4. Re: suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey > (Richard Weait) > 5. Re: suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey (Alan Mintz) > 6. Re: Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes (Craig Hinners) > 7. Re: suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey > (Nathan Edgars II) > 8. Re: suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey > (Nathan Mills) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 08:52:56 -0400 > From: "Hillsman, Edward" <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey > Message-ID: > <5e720878f33d3244932503066fc93bf067f5b86...@usfmail2.forest.usf.edu > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On 3/14/2012 21:18:57 -0400 Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > >Depending on the state or local government, you may be able to verify > >names against an official dataset. Otherwise subdivision plats work for > >the endless suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey. > > In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to participate > in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it generally true > that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? And, if so, > why? Because these are home to so many people in the US, it raises a > question about the viability of strategies that suggest people start in OSM > by mapping their own neighborhoods. > > I admit that I prefer not to, but because of where I live and work, my > activity space doesn't take me into them very often. I did start out in OSM > by mapping my neighborhood surroundings. I have mapped some subdivisions > (ways and land-uses but not individual houses) and don't find them boring > or onerous (for onerous, splitting streets into dual carriageways is at the > top of my list). > > Ed Hillsman > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:27:03 -0400 > From: Mike N <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to > survey > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 3/15/2012 8:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: > > In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to > participate in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it > generally true that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? > And, if so, why? Because these are home to so many people in the US, it > raises a question about the viability of strategies that suggest people > start in OSM by mapping their own neighborhoods. > > I don't know anything about this specifically. It's interesting that > not a single person in those 120 subdivisions was interested in mapping > their own subdivision. I have done some onsite surveys of smaller > subdivisions (100-400 homes), and can set this up with a camera, video > cam, and bike to collect quite a lot of information in a single visit, > and the end result is streets with lanes, speed limits, one ways, and > house numbers. In this area, since no one else is participating[1], > it's just a practical matter to create the base new subdivision > information from TIGER since the local governments don't freely give > this information. The only followup surveys are quick to clarify > obvious errors in the TIGER data. > > The subdivision plat idea is new to me, but I'm not sure where I'd find > them. > > [1] It is notable that likely because of the Apple publicity spike, a > single new mapper popped up and added streets in his neighborhood and > did a quality job. If this was indeed because of the lure of the > 'blank page', our license removal exercise will create many more blank > pages to test this theory with. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:35:07 -0500 > From: Martijn van Exel <[email protected]> > To: "Hillsman, Edward" <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to > survey > Message-ID: > <CAGCum_4ACYG0KHz3O=wZLZHFbwoWnJZN2gbFPhf=c88lwp7...@mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi, > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to participate > > in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it generally > true > > that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? And, if so, > > why? Because these are home to so many people in the US, it raises a > > question about the viability of strategies that suggest people start in > OSM > > by mapping their own neighborhoods. > > > It would be straightforward enough to do some analysis on this, and I > concur that it would be interesting, if only there was some geographical > demarcation file of these types of neighborhoods. Would it be possible to > define that? > > Apart from that, I can see why these areas seem to have low priority. I am > going to make a lot of assumptions here, because that's all I can do > without having really investigated. > Subdivisions make for boring mapping. It is repetitive and there seems to > be no end to them. OSM contributors invest their free time in the project > and want to get something out of it: fun, a sense of accomplishment. So > they spend their time on fun mapping projects, not boring ones. Considering > that the US is horribly understaffed with contributors, subdivisions are > much less likely to be tended to, unless one of those sparse mappers has > some personal incentive. > > I see two ways to break this: 1) attract more mappers. 2) make boring > projects fun. I see both tasks as core to growing OpenStreetMap in the US, > and they are related. > > -- > martijn van exel > geospatial omnivore > 1109 1st ave #2 > salt lake city, ut 84103 > 801-550-5815 > http://oegeo.wordpress.com > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20120315/baa36ec6/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:27:01 -0400 > From: Richard Weait <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected] Openstreetmap" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to > survey > Message-ID: > <CAGwUD5sMZr4nF8CT=pbs9yaw2pfzaux73vzwuypv1ae0e_2...@mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Martijn van Exel <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > >> > >> In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to > participate > >> in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it generally > true > >> that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? > > [ ... ] > > Apart from that, I can see why these areas seem to have low priority. > [ ... ] > > Subdivisions make for boring mapping. > [ ... ] > > I see two ways to break this: 1) attract more mappers. > > I don't accept that mapping a subdivision is any more-boring or > less-rewarding than other forms of mapping. The caveat is "as long as > it is your subdivision". Sure, they might be row upon row of similar > construction, but at least they are row upon of similar construction > full of your friends and neighbours. That motivates the mapper to put > it on the map and to get it right. > > That new, local mapper is most likely to update the map when one field > is converted to a cricket pitch, and when the local convenience store > has a name change a few years down the road. You can't beat that as a > mapper from a distance. > > So, yes. Attract more mappers, in more places. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:15:20 -0700 > From: Alan Mintz <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to > survey > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > At 2012-03-15 06:27, Mike N wrote: > >On 3/15/2012 8:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: > >>In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to participate > >>in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it generally > >>true that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? And, if > >>so, why? Because these are home to so many people in the US, it raises a > >>question about the viability of strategies that suggest people start in > >>OSM by mapping their own neighborhoods. > > > > I don't know anything about this specifically. It's interesting that > > not a single person in those 120 subdivisions was interested in mapping > > their own subdivision. > > Assuming we're talking about the US, not really surprising. I've mapped > hundreds of subdivisions in southern Cal. In particular, dozens of them > were not on the map at all, having been developed after TIGER's 2005 source > date. Some were not even on Google Maps, so you'd think someone out there > other than me would have wanted to map them. > > > > I have done some onsite surveys of smaller subdivisions (100-400 > > homes), and can set this up with a camera, video cam, and bike to > > collect quite a lot of information in a single visit, and the end result > > is streets with lanes, speed limits, one ways, and house numbers. > > Yup - me too, with a car, GPS, and a digital camera. > > > > In this area, since no one else is participating[1], it's just a > > practical matter to create the base new subdivision information from > > TIGER since the local governments don't freely give this > > information. The only followup surveys are quick to clarify obvious > > errors in the TIGER data. > > > >The subdivision plat idea is new to me, but I'm not sure where I'd find > them. > > I've recently done this when I see an area that really is untouched. I > first make sure that all the ways are the original TIGER ways > ("tiger:cfcc"=* ((version:1 user:DaveHansenTiger) | (version:2 > user:balrog-kun))), remove them, then convert and transplant in new > TIGER2011 data, connecting it to existing ways at the borders. > > BTW, many (most IME) county governments have at least some data available > for free. Assessor's maps are generally more available, though keep in mind > that they are less authoritative on naming than tract/parcel maps because > the assessor's role is more related to the land parcels than the streets > between them. Tract/parcel maps, records of surveys, roadbooks, etc. are > generally available from the planning and/or public works departments. > While they are usually filed with the county recorder, that avenue is > usually not free. All it takes is a little digging. If you run into a > fee-required situation, don't be afraid to ask for a waiver, describing OSM > and your need to use them as a reference. That's worked for me. > > -- > Alan Mintz <[email protected]> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 11:53:14 -0700 > From: "Craig Hinners" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes > Message-ID: > < > 20120315115314.fc51b6200e9fb8577c2c80bc0fc5554d.0f6fbbbd31....@email03.secureserver.net > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > This was discussed in the August 2011 thread, "Use of ref-tag on state > highways". > > At the time, a number of people seemed to be on board with the > "network-classification-per-banner" scheme, as in: > network=US:US:Alternate > ref=1 > > Or, something similar at the state level: > network=US:VA:Secondary > ref=7100 > > I think all that really remains is to formalize/define the valid values > for the various federal- and state-level "network" tags in the wiki. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 17:59:47 -0400 > From: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to > survey > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 3/15/2012 8:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: > > On 3/14/2012 21:18:57 -0400 Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > > >> Depending on the state or local government, you may be able to verify > >> names against an official dataset. Otherwise subdivision plats work for > >> the endless suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey. > > > > In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to > participate in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it > generally true that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? > And, if so, why? Because these are home to so many people in the US, it > raises a question about the viability of strategies that suggest people > start in OSM by mapping their own neighborhoods. > > I was talking specifically about driving through these neighborhoods to > get street names. Obviously if you live there it's different, or if you > live nearby and exercise by bike. But driving through subdivisions far > from home has a high cost-to-benefit ratio - lots of driving and all you > get is street names, since everything else is single-family houses. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 17:43:58 -0500 > From: Nathan Mills <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to > survey > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 3/15/2012 4:59 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > lots of driving and all you get is street names, since everything else > > is single-family houses. > > And address points, amenities, water features, gates, and whatever else > might be around, maybe a bridge or a stream or something. Oh, and don't > forget the streets themselves if aerial imagery is outdated. It's not > terribly exciting, but it's not terribly hard, either. A few hundred > house subdivision only takes a couple of hours at most to map and input. > > If all I wanted was street names, I'd ask the planning commission. > > Besides, there's some amount of fun that comes from "beating" Google. ;) > > -Nathan > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > End of Talk-us Digest, Vol 52, Issue 18 > *************************************** >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
