On 6/2/16 4:59 PM, Madeline Steele wrote: > > The approach that is preferred at TriMet (where I work) is that if we > are able to check the geometry of the street against fairly recent > imagery (improving it if needed) and verify the name of the street, > from either our local jurisdictional centerlines or the latest TIGER > TMS layer, then we remove all of the TIGER tags. We see that as being > adequate to remove the TIGER:reviewed tag (especially when multiple > mappers have edited the way since the initial import, which is > typical). We think that the other TIGER tags are not needed as they’re > mostly comprised of information that isn’t really appropriate for the > street ways (zip code and county, which take up less space and are > easier to keep up-to-date when maintained as separate boundary > polygons) and attributes that can be derived from other fields (e.g., > prefix, basename, suffix). While it could be handy to have these > address components broken out, it adds bulk and requires updating > several fields when a name is changed. Further, the TIGER attributes > are mostly really outdated at this point as they come from 2005 data > and have rarely been updated by mappers. > > > What do you all think about this? > > i usually leave the county tags, and remove all the others. there are rare cases where a road has a historic name but is no longer signed and i may in that case convert the tiger name into an old_name tag. i think the zip tags from tiger are without value.
richard -- [email protected] Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
