> And we took the decision to use this info > to spot rapidly the populated areas. «Take time» to look at these > polygons one by one (we did) and you will see that they reflect > adequately the density of housing in these areas.
No, they don't (at least not for any meaningful definition of "density of housing"). In any case even if they did - iso-lines of some model of a building density field are quite fundamentally not something that is mappable in OSM, especially not with landuse=residential. It seems i need to clarify one thing: My harsh criticizm of the data imported (which i stand by firmly) is about the data. I - just like probably everyone else here - am aware that clairedelune did not generate this data. The kind of problem we see here is exactly the reason why we have import guidelines and why we need a directed editing policy so mappers do not get into a situation where they add bad data in larger volume because they follow - usually with good intentions - the unqualified instructions of others or wrongly believe the quality claims of data providers. If the import plans had been properly discussed we could have had this discussion in advance and could have considered useful options - like for example the idea of impoting the buildings as Rory suggested. I also want to make sure this example is not blown out of proportion. There are plenty of bad quality imports and bad mapping in OSM. If you look at landuse=residential mapping in Eastern Africa this is not the worst data in the database, not by a large margin. I just pointed it out here as an example because it was a perfect fit for the idea John brought up. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
