> -----Original Message----- > From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 8:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposed import: Alaska Boroughs/CPDs > > Hi, > > On 11/26/12 05:51, Paul Norman wrote: > > There is more detail at > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Alaska/TIGER_Counties, but in brief > > the import will be more accurate, not override any existing > > contributions except mine and be better tagged. > > Will these new borders correctly re-use parts of the existing coastline > and/or state boundary, or will things look like > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.26415252685547&lon=- > 95.7297134399414&zoom=15 > > or > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=57.16290593147278&lon=- > 92.50400304794312&zoom=15 > > (both featured on "Worst of OSM" in the past)?
As mentioned, they'll reuse the existing country and state boundary (they're the same for Alaska). On the coast side it turns out that they're defined going to the limit of the state submerged lands which is 3 miles away from the coastline so this isn't an issue and it wouldn't be near any existing boundaries. The current boundaries are pretty bad, see http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=70.332&lon=-150.568&zoom=10 or http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=70.48&lon=-160.17&zoom=9 Or really, just see anywhere on the north slope. I merged the ways so you didn't have individually tagged 100 node sections and now it's one properly done relation, but the geometry is still a horrid mess. Something I didn't mention was import size. This would be on the order of 35k-37k nodes. That's a lot of nodes for the number of ways, but we're talking about kilometers between nodes still. Alaska is *huge*. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
