Nathan, On 03/28/2017 11:06 AM, Nathan Mixter wrote: > California has more than triple the amount of data available than any > other state. Importing it will be no small task but doing it in chunks > by several people will make it manageable.
I know that singling you out borders on the impolite but I can't resist on this occasion. I haven't analysed data in the US systematically but I have had very many cases where I looked at an area in the US and thought to myself "uh, someone has imported individual plot boundaries here", or "uh, this funny landuse origami here seems to be totally out of touch with imagery" and then when I looked at who was behind that, it turned out to be another nmixter import. Over the years, you have imported a lot of stuff into OSM that probably would not stand up to scrutiny in an import review like we do them today. The thought of you leading any kind of major import attempt in the US fills me with dread. Now maybe I'm doing you injustice and you are having second thoughts about some of the things you did in the past. That would of course be great. I do remember at least one discussion in which you agreed to revert a particularly broken landuse import that a couple of your countrymen complained about but I don't know how rare an exception that was. If I had a choice, I would much prefer if you could apply your time to revisiting the data you have imported over the years, and check whether that data stands up to today's quality expectations, and whether it is worth keeping at all. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
