Thank you, Tod. Yes, I MIGHT find a VERY SELECT SUBSET of these data SOMEWHAT useful, as minor amounts of them seem to be accurate and more-up-to-date enough to introduce into OSM. But certainly not using any sort of automated method. Essentially, every single datum would need to be human-reviewed, possibly corrected, likely conflated, and for a great many of them, on-the-ground verified. I'd say "garbage" seems too strong, but "very noisy with a highly limited potential to add some minor value to our map, coupled with great effort to vet, improve and enter the data" seems about right.
SteveA California > On Oct 26, 2017, at 10:50 AM, Tod Fitch <[email protected]> wrote: > In the area I now live in California, my first impression looking at this is > that the data is garbage. It looks to me that blindly importing would > re-introduce TIGER errors that have been successfully removed. Looking at a > tiny area in Arizona where my family still has a house, it is not much better. > > My opinion is that a direct import of this data should not be done at all. > > That said, when helping clean up the chdr reversion mess in Arizona I noticed > a number of new subdivisions in the Phoenix metro area where this data set > could be useful. But it would need to be done very selectively. For example, > there are new roads shown that are not evident in the aerial imagery > available to us for OSM. I would not add those unless a ground survey > indicated they actually exist. And there are lots that I would characterize > as tracks or service roads that have the traditional TIGER residential value. > > Is a null length value even valid? Looking at the raw OSM files I see > ‘k="name" v=""’ in a number of places. > > Tod _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
