Past NHD imports have made vast multipolygons which can be difficult to interpret without a view of the whole thing. This made particular problems for tiles@home/osmarender, which tried to render the multipolygons without loading their out-of-area members, leading to water-land inversion in a lot of places. Editing these multipolygons may be error-prone too, though need for such editing should be rare. If you can somehow limit the size of the multipolygons, this issue can probably be mitigated. On Oct 27, 2012 7:29 PM, "Clifford Snow" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I saw bsupnik's wiki page, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Bsupnik, on > importing of NHD into OSM. I'm working on National Parks in Washington > State. After spending countless hours tracing in streams and rivers into > OSM, I've finally decided that importing makes more sense. I'm wondering > what the consensus was on using NHD in OSM? The data can be downloaded as > shapefiles from the USGS website. With Paul Norman's ogr2osm script and > translation tables, the data looks like to could be imported into OSM. In > the areas I'm focusing on, it would need to be done almost stream by stream > since some of the data already exists. And doing it in small batches allows > for easy alignment with a Bing image. (These are areas that a survey is > nearly impossible due to the large amount of difficult terrain involved.) > > One of the advantages to using the NHD data over topo maps is getting the > correct names on the streams. The existing topo maps make it difficult to > determine named streams from un-named ones. > > Before I bring this up on the imports list, I thought I'd ask the US > community about their opinion about importing the data. > -- > Clifford > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
