Yes, comparing against the big G is laziness/default. The maps that you get from the NGI would be the best source for comparison in South Africa but I believe they are 1:30 000 so not very high resolution. There might be higher resolution maps available...
Regards On 29 April 2013 13:42, Marlon v/d Linde <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there > > I find myself agreeing with Craig. > Coverage and up-to-date'dness would be key to quality. Following that, > detail (the difference between a named road, and completely zoned area and > typed/named road with POI of important points). > The "big name with a g" seems to be what people measure up against, which > I dislike. Mostly because they measure the candy, features and looks > against real useful data. > Adding on to Gerhardus' response, then yes, density comparison, but like > him, I have my doubts in its value. > > > Marlon > > > > > > > > Marlon B v/d Linde ( [email protected] ) > > > [ ▇ ▄ ▅ █ ▇ ▂ ▃ ▁ ▄ ▅ █ ▅ ▇ ] > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Craig Leat <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The devil is in the detail. I would say you can have a high quality >> map, but with limited coverage. Think of the site plan of your house. >> To assess quality or coverage I don't think you can compare OSM to >> other map providers, as which provider represents the gold standard? I >> would change the question to rather look at suitability for a task and >> then define the task. >> >> Craig >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-ZA mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ZA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za > > -- Gerhardus Geldenhuis
_______________________________________________ Talk-ZA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za
