More than about one third of Hungary has already been imported from the CLC dataset by others. The following tag is used for attribution:
source=© EEA, Koppenhága (2009); Készítette a FÖMI a KvVM megbízásából (2009) I'm not a lawyer but I think this tagging is correct. see http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-April/057501.html What I do about existing data is: I check all the existing landuse polygons by hand before import. I remove most of the landuse=residential polygons, as they are usually also present in the CLC dataset and the CLC versions are more accurate (checked with Bing). There are also some existing sporadic forests and meadows, but usually they are also represented in CLC so then I delete them and copy the extra information (e.g. name of forest) into the newly imported forest polygon. There were 2-3 cases when CLC and existing data disagreed about a forest, CLC marked it as farm. Then I left both the existing and new data in place and tagged the forests with "fixme=please check this, i don't see any forest here on Bing and CLC marks this as farm, too" or something. I don't think CLC is low resolution. Vineyards, meadows, forests, etc. are usually accurate. See for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.3314&lon=19.0919&zoom=13&layers=M You can see here that CLC is well-detailed. Nevertheless, there are some voids that need to be filled manually in the future, as you can also see on the linked map fragment. On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Paul Norman <[email protected]> wrote: > What tagging are you proposing to use?**** > > ** ** > > What do you intend to do about existing data?**** > > ** ** > > I’ve heard that CLC is a fairly low resolution dataset and not well suited > to OSM which is higher resolution. Is this true in your area?**** > > ** >
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
