B.K. DeLong wrote:
At 09:19 AM 8/18/2006, Bill Thoen wrote:
I imagine that a community effort to maintain a data set that
represents a
road network would operate in a way similar to a wiki, but how do you
ensure that additions and "fixes" are done with the appropriate
precision
and accuracy (and who decides?)
There'd have to be a standard to which the data would have to reach
before allowing anyone to use the dataset - perhaps using legal
disclaimers. The site would also need to set a series of guidelines
and requirements for degrees of accuracy and required information
needed to meet those standards. Who decides? Hopefully as the site
grows there will be a Wikipedia like hierarchy of editors and decision
makers who choose when an area has met that threshhold.
Who interprets road classifications and
other attributes that mean different things to different people?
Those standards are already set by the government/civil bodies who
oversee the roads. Use those classifications where possible.
That's no guarantee of consistent classification. Each level of
government may have different ideas about the same road, reflecting
their own perspective. This is one of the things I like about the idea
to use a car equipped with a camera. With video, date and GPS location
recorded and available as a reference, then a lot of these issues become
easier to resolve. If you can see what a road actually looked like, then
you could judge for yourself whether FHWA's classification of "urban
collector" or the city's classifcation of "major route" is more
appropriate for purposes of say, planning evacuation routes.
And a wiki could certainly provide links to video resources. With all
the video and GPS resources available in the public hands (and all the
server storage space, too) I imagine this might not be so far-fetched.
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
