Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
Stephen's reply is pretty spot on. But also, On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Of all the ways in Australia, less than 50% have source tag for how the location/name information was derived. Of those that do, around half indicate some form of imagery was used as the source (it seems that we are a country of tracers :-). Perhaps that is because, unlike some other countries, we have high resolution, accurate and current imagery that we can trace under a free license --nearmap. If you have these 4 components and you combine it with doing a ground survey just before or after tracing, then why wouldn't you trace? The resulting data is more accurate than your consumer GPS and just as recent. On the plus side your (or at least my) overall mapping is more efficient so you can do more. In my opinion. Interestingly enough, around a quarter of ways traced from imagery are named, with no source tag indicating of how the name of the way was derived, could you say that at least some of these have been surveyed without being tagged accordingly? Or could you even think something more sinister? ... and how many of my ways traced from imagery and named have no source tag indicating how the name was derived and how the location of the feature was derived? If there is no source tag you can't know if the name was from a ground survey, or just copied from a non-free source. I've encountered both situations before, and just reinforces why I try to encourage contributors to add source information. I can't really do anything else except for going out doing the survey and subsequently adding a source tag, so I suggest you try to help be part of the solution and add source information to all the data you add. My conclusion - there is no way I can see in Australia to reliably construct a surveyed or traced data-set based on the tagged source information as it now exists. Yep I agree. I've tried my best with my edits to allow for that, but others are free to do as they wish so long as they are really using free data. The only way forward I see is improve the database by adding in your own source tags when they are missing as you re-survey things. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On 6 September 2011 19:33, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: With the use of source tags you won't have to, you can filter out anything without source=survey leaving you with a map with just surveyed data (in theory). You filtering out data you don't like is a much better option than forcing everyone else to not have access to that data just because you don't like it. (I'm thinking of the case where you have some area/features that no one is currently mapping by local_knowledge, and some kind soul helps out by tracing the area/feature that no one else has added from a ground survey yet). (but this will omit stuff which was originally traced, but then confirmed via survey without the need to update the source tags as nothing was updated) Had a bit of a look into this.. Of all the ways in Australia, less than 50% have source tag for how the location/name information was derived. Of those that do, around half indicate some form of imagery was used as the source (it seems that we are a country of tracers :-). Interestingly enough, around a quarter of ways traced from imagery are named, with no source tag indicating of how the name of the way was derived, could you say that at least some of these have been surveyed without being tagged accordingly? Or could you even think something more sinister? My conclusion - there is no way I can see in Australia to reliably construct a surveyed or traced data-set based on the tagged source information as it now exists. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: As you say, time isn't the only consideration. I wouldn't want to be navigating anywhere important based on a map merely consisting of vectorised aerial imagery. IMO OSMers are the ones who should be having the adventures down the road that may or may not connect, may or may not be open to the public, etc, leaving our data consumers with the benefit of our endeavours with maps accurately reflecting what is on the ground. With the use of source tags you won't have to, you can filter out anything without source=survey leaving you with a map with just surveyed data (in theory). You filtering out data you don't like is a much better option than forcing everyone else to not have access to that data just because you don't like it. (I'm thinking of the case where you have some area/features that no one is currently mapping by local_knowledge, and some kind soul helps out by tracing the area/feature that no one else has added from a ground survey yet). (but this will omit stuff which was originally traced, but then confirmed via survey without the need to update the source tags as nothing was updated) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On 5 September 2011 14:31, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: You need to be explicit about the comparison you're making. This is volunteer labour, and you can't meaningfully compare the contribution that people are willing to make against the contribution you'd prefer they make. And if you want to, you have to factor in time and other costs. I can trace 10 streets in the time you can survey one. We could argue about which is the more valuable contribution - or we could recognise that both are valuable, and get back to it. Hi, As I said, it is an issue as old as OSM that isn't likely to be resolved here and now. You may recall in the early days of segments, there was a capability to add a path from tracing, which didn't appear on the map, and then when it was surveyed, confirmed and named, it would have a rendered way that was part of the map. Personally, I think people shouldn't map areas when they don't have any knowledge of the topology and layout because I think fixing errors takes several orders of magnitude longer than the tracing. Any perceived time saving is illusory, when someone has to visit the area sooner or later anyway. I think having a complete map is very long term goal, and having an accurate map is a higher priority. I'd much rather a street be missing than wrong, and accuracy comes cheaper when accurate work is done the first time. OSM remains a successful project, and when we have people who are mapping underground pipes and antennas on top of buildings, volunteer time doesn't seem to be the first consideration. However, I understand that the community has a divergence of views. I understand that everyone makes mistakes, even from the most detailed survey, and accordingly I'm sure you will find as many supporters of your position as detractors. If everyone makes sure that the source tags are updated accurately, and continue to discuss errors we find in a cooperative manner, hopefully we'll all manage to map happily every after. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: As I said, it is an issue as old as OSM that isn't likely to be resolved here and now. You may recall in the early days of segments, there was a capability to add a path from tracing, which didn't appear on the map, and then when it was surveyed, confirmed and named, it would have a rendered way that was part of the map. Personally, I think people shouldn't map areas when they don't have any knowledge of the topology and layout because I think fixing errors takes several orders of magnitude longer than the tracing. Any perceived time saving is illusory, when someone has to visit the area sooner or later anyway. I think having a complete map is very long term goal, and having an accurate map is a higher priority. I'd much rather a street be missing than wrong, and accuracy comes cheaper when accurate work is done the first time. OSM remains a successful project, and when we have people who are mapping underground pipes and antennas on top of buildings, volunteer time doesn't seem to be the first consideration. The imagery never becomes available before the on the ground geography. Giving eager mapers time to fill in via survey before the imagery comes. However, I understand that the community has a divergence of views. I understand that everyone makes mistakes, even from the most detailed survey, and accordingly I'm sure you will find as many supporters of your position as detractors. If everyone makes sure that the source tags are updated accurately, and continue to discuss errors we find in a cooperative manner, hopefully we'll all manage to map happily every after. ... and if you find errors in the existing data (whether it be from survey or tracing) you are free to fix it up. The only grounds I can think of for the community to not accept data from contributors is incompatible license or incorrect data. If imagery leads to incorrect data, all the community can do is fix it up from their survey work. All the time we are really a do-ocracy. If you prefer ground survey, then go out and do some ground surveys and soon the map will be full of ground surved work, in fact I've probably passed you in the Shire doing the same thing without even realising. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: The imagery never becomes available before the on the ground geography. Giving eager mapers time to fill in via survey before the imagery comes. Not always true, actually. New building sites appear on Nearmap (yes, I know...) before public access is available. And there's lots of stuff that can't really be mapped any other way (industrial sites come to mind). The only grounds I can think of for the community to not accept data from contributors is incompatible license or incorrect data. If imagery leads to incorrect data, all the community can do is fix it up from their survey work. Well, if there are contributors whose output costs others more time than it saves, then of course the community should reject it. Usually the debate about whether that's the case will totally overwhelm whatever the difference is though. Anyway, I'm quite glad there are people who enjoy ground surveying. And some of those people apparently are glad that there are people who prefer aerial tracing. What a team we all make! Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
I wonder if this thread may have deviated a little from my original topic, but anyway: I noticed some un-mapped streets on Sydney's northern beaches. They look to be under construction on Bing (and not particularly clear in the photo) so they could use a survey, if anyone happens to be in the area. Somewhere around here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.72396lon=151.27789zoom=17layers=M I suspect the missing streets are just north of James Wheeler Place in Narabeen, or possibly James Wheeler Place has been extended. - Ben. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
Someone wrote Yep. A one-way street mapped as a two-way street is better than nothing. To me this statement absoluetly defines the difference between people who just want to see lots of lines on the map and people who want to actually use the map for navigation. Many moons ago I was driving on the 17 mile drive, trying to get to a golf course for a round. I accidently took a wrong turn and then the pathetic Teleatlas maps tried to get me to turn up one way streets the wrong way, eight times in a row. I just turned off the unit and navigated by the sun (which is hard for us Aussies in the Northern Hemisphere). This experience (plus some others with the substandard sensis maps) convinced me that we really need up-to-date ACCURATE maps which match reality. In Canberra I think I've fixed up all the one way streets that were not so marked. When up in Queansland, I was on a left handed golf tour and on the way home the bus driver, at one of the stops, admitted he was new to the job and didn't know the way to the next hotel. Of course I was capturing gps traces at the time so I told him just turn left into Smith street and then take the next right at the T junction. Unfortunately I was using sensis mapping and when we got to the right turn, there was a no right turn sign. The whole bus laughed a lot at this useless computer technonoly and the bus driver in frustration just turned right anyway, nearly taking out the sign and a few pedestrians as well. There are so many other examples where near enough is good enough maps are just so dangerous but time does fix most things and eventually the planet will be surveyed properly and we will have usefull maps. I think 10 years may see Australia with good mapping. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
I wrote: Personally, I think people shouldn't map areas when they don't have any knowledge of the topology and layout because I think fixing errors takes several orders of magnitude longer than the tracing. On 6 September 2011 10:31, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: Who cares? Um, Me? Maybe you? That's not the right comparison. Does fixing the errors take several times longer than editing it from nothing? I think it does, yes. And in the meantime you have data that may be wrong. Personally, on the local scale where most OSM Australia mapping is up to, I struggle to see much benefit of having the vectors traced from imagery on a map over the raw imagery itself. The local visit can certainly add more details, (street names for a start) but it's damn rare that it will get a better overall layout positioning. Lot's of gps traces can be just as good, but that takes multiple visits on different days to get good averaging. I think this is a proposition that could probably do with more empirical evidence. Especially with the halcyon days of nearmap behind us. I do have roads and cycleways that I have many many GPS traces for the single way over multiple visits, and the divergence appears very limited. Of course GPS signals can lose it entirely occasionally with reflections, etc, but it isn't like the surveyor doesn't have the imagery as another arrow in their quiver. If things get displaced it isn't hard to highlight areas of possible concern and investigate the errors further. If after understanding the topology, on-the-ground changes, and any offset, the easiest way is to trace the imagery for a way, then that is an option still open to the surveyor. Any perceived time saving is illusory, when someone has to visit the area sooner or later anyway. Again, who cares? You are only responding to half an argument. Steve was saying that he can map 10x the area from imagery than I can from surveying in the same time, and advocating that as a benefit of imagery tracing. My response to that was that the time saving is illusory, because after he maps from the imagery, I still have to go there and survey it. Well, words to that effect anyway... Beside which, you're wrong. I've done a lot of mapping, and it takes the less time overall to do an area from good imagery first, then go fill in the details on the ground than to do it all from tracing. It also makes the ground visit quicker, As I said, I recognise there is a divergence of views here, including among people who have made substantial contributions to the map. Most of the views have been given a fair airing in the past, and I'm not expecting a new consensus here and now. However, I do, with respect, still disagree with you. As you say, time isn't the only consideration. I wouldn't want to be navigating anywhere important based on a map merely consisting of vectorised aerial imagery. IMO OSMers are the ones who should be having the adventures down the road that may or may not connect, may or may not be open to the public, etc, leaving our data consumers with the benefit of our endeavours with maps accurately reflecting what is on the ground. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: Yep. A one-way street mapped as a two-way street is better than nothing. To me this statement absoluetly defines the difference between people who just want to see lots of lines on the map and people who want to actually use the map for navigation. Or maybe the difference between people who think all navigation takes place on four wheels and the rest of us. /snark Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au wrote: Next trip will be in a week, but it will be my daughter's birthday and I don't know if I'll have time. Update on Cowra mapping: I went to a birthday party, I flew a kite, I built a fence, I fed some cows, I drove a semi-trailer, but I did not collect street names or GPS traces. Yet again I tell myself Next time. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Since you asked: One way streets? Yep. A one-way street mapped as a two-way street is better than nothing. Roads with barriers at the end of them? It's highly unlikely that a truly impassable (by bike) street would be incorrectly mapped from aerial imagery. By contrast, I've fixed, from imagery, impassable roads that had previously been traced from out of copyright maps. Roads with no entry signs? I'm happy to take my chances. Cross country roads that are private and gated? They make great stories. Through roads mapped as service roads, and v.v? Not sure why that would be a problem. The amount of incorrect names, roads, etc in other maps sources verges on the absurd. In my local area I could point to tens of examples of streets on other maps sources with the wrong names. Me too. I could also point to thousands of examples of streets with the right name. I'd like to think the survey and consequent accuracy is an integral part of OSM. To me, accuracy is an aspirational goal, ranking somewhat lower than completeness. This tracing vs survey argument is as old as OSM is. My vision of OSM is to get take a different route on the bike, or see more of a town when you are passing through, or even go for a walk around streets in your local area, So your motivation for working on OSM is to get out and about? That's great. rather than being a mechanical turk in front of a computer screen, but each to their own. Indeed. Criticising the contribution that myself and other aerial tracers make for its inherent limitations is not really to each their own, though... Sometimes there is no alternative to tracing, but I think tracing without actually ever having placed a foot on the ground in the area, leads to a significantly poorer quality map, and you don't need to delve to far into the database for evidence of that.. Poorer than what? You need to be explicit about the comparison you're making. This is volunteer labour, and you can't meaningfully compare the contribution that people are willing to make against the contribution you'd prefer they make. And if you want to, you have to factor in time and other costs. I can trace 10 streets in the time you can survey one. We could argue about which is the more valuable contribution - or we could recognise that both are valuable, and get back to it. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On 30 August 2011 16:41, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: 1) Roads without names are almost as valuable as roads with names for certain uses. (Eg, choosing a route to save to a GPS works just as well without names) One way streets? Roads with barriers at the end of them? Roads with no entry signs? Cross country roads that are private and gated? Through roads mapped as service roads, and v.v? 2) There are strong arguments that there is no copyright in street names. If that argument is ever developed, we could easily fill in all the street names from other sources without doing the ground surveying. The amount of incorrect names, roads, etc in other maps sources verges on the absurd. In my local area I could point to tens of examples of streets on other maps sources with the wrong names. I'd like to think the survey and consequent accuracy is an integral part of OSM. And seriously, if we OSM ended up being traces with imported street names? I shudder to think.. Surveying suburban streets by GPS these days makes about as much sense as using a horse and cart on a freeway... This tracing vs survey argument is as old as OSM is. My vision of OSM is to get take a different route on the bike, or see more of a town when you are passing through, or even go for a walk around streets in your local area, rather than being a mechanical turk in front of a computer screen, but each to their own. Sometimes there is no alternative to tracing, but I think tracing without actually ever having placed a foot on the ground in the area, leads to a significantly poorer quality map, and you don't need to delve to far into the database for evidence of that.. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 August 2011 16:41, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Surveying suburban streets by GPS these days makes about as much sense as using a horse and cart on a freeway... This tracing vs survey argument is as old as OSM is. My vision of OSM is to get take a different route on the bike, or see more of a town when you are passing through, or even go for a walk around streets in your local area, rather than being a mechanical turk in front of a computer screen, but each to their own. Personally I very much agree with this. I'd never spend my time tracing the roads of some boring suburb that I have no personal ties to. But I'm very glad that not everyone feels this way. Sometimes there is no alternative to tracing, but I think tracing without actually ever having placed a foot on the ground in the area, leads to a significantly poorer quality map, and you don't need to delve to far into the database for evidence of that.. Obviously a map is potentially better if one adds foot-on-the-ground surveying to whatever other methods you are using. But that's about all one can say. Tracing is quite often more accurate and/or precise than using a GPS. If high res imagery is available, and it appears to be well aligned, I'm pretty much always going to use that rather than GPS tracks, even if I have done a foot-on-the-ground survey. Put another way, unless your survey equipment is something equivalent to a google car (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stewb2008/5840727837/) or google bike (http://searchengineland.com/google-woos-brits-with-bike-based-street-view-project-19519), foot/tire-on-the-ground surveying without using high res imagery also invariably leads to a significantly poorer quality map. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: The other interesting thing is that when I was finished, pretty much none of the ways I drew and/or imported from the gps, had names on them! (I did the surveying alone and didn't care to pull over every time I saw a sign, or to endanger myself by recording it without pulling over.) I guess by Nick's theory all my efforts were counter-productive! Don't worry, we can always delete your data so someone else can go and do it properly :) Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On 26/08/2011, at 1:33 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: I'm sure all the avid tracersout there will deny this,but, I believe that this is the downside to tracing. Once an area looks well mapped, there is little incentive for anyone to go there to map it properly. I'd really like it if all roads that don't have names yet (in OSM) were just deleted. Then II'd be much more inclined to drive there and collect all the infomation. If a road doesn't have a name, then it shows up in the No-names render - that should be enough incentive to go there. When I went to Dubbo a couple of weeks ago, I printed off the no-names map specifically to get some names. A couple of the roads I had previously traced myself from Bing prior to going. Also, on my last trip I did as much tracing from Bing as I could before I went, then got names on the way. For example, prior to my trip, Peterborough (South Australia) only had the main roads passing through. I traced all the streets prior to travel, then collected as many street names as I could on the way through (there are still a few names to collect). I didn't have time to drive every street, so if I hadn't done the tracing first, I would have had to leave Peterborough with no streets (maybe doing one or two streets only on the way through). Mark P. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: this is the downside to tracing. Once an area looks well mapped, there is little incentive for anyone to go there to map it properly. I'd really like it if all roads that don't have names yet (in OSM) were just deleted. Then II'd be much more inclined to drive there and collect all the infomation. Strong disagreement here. A few reasons: 1) Roads without names are almost as valuable as roads with names for certain uses. (Eg, choosing a route to save to a GPS works just as well without names) 2) There are strong arguments that there is no copyright in street names. If that argument is ever developed, we could easily fill in all the street names from other sources without doing the ground surveying. 3) there is little incentive for anyone to go there - perhaps subjective, but I'm much more motivated to go to a well-mapped area to check on specific details than to go to an empty area where no one has even done the low-hanging fruit (ie, traced the streets). Surveying suburban streets by GPS these days makes about as much sense as using a horse and cart on a freeway... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
Hi Ben, I'm sure all the avid tracersout there will deny this,but, I believe that this is the downside to tracing. Once an area looks well mapped, there is little incentive for anyone to go there to map it properly. I'd really like it if all roads that don't have names yet (in OSM) were just deleted. Then II'd be much more inclined to drive there and collect all the infomation. I think that I may have traced a couple of roads in Grand Junction Colorado,but I'm about to drive there to collect names and any other info available. Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On 26/08/11 13:33, Nick Hocking wrote: I'd really like it if all roads that don't have names yet (in OSM) were just deleted. Then II'd be much more inclined to drive there and collect all the infomation. Having a quick look around, it looks like one of us needs to put some names onto the map of Cowra: http://osm.org/go/uNfeplBS-?layers=N John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 06:32:14 +1000 John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: On 26/08/11 13:33, Nick Hocking wrote: I'd really like it if all roads that don't have names yet (in OSM) were just deleted. Then II'd be much more inclined to drive there and collect all the infomation. Having a quick look around, it looks like one of us needs to put some names onto the map of Cowra: http://osm.org/go/uNfeplBS-?layers=N John H A lot of those streets were placed by a particular person whom I know traced from Google in particular places. I'll stop that accusation there. I haven't been able to put many names to streets in Cowra because I don't travel through there often. If the streets are traced from sources which shouldn't have been used, then of course they should be deleted as Nick suggests. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
On 27/08/11 06:47, Liz wrote: A lot of those streets were placed by a particular person whom I know traced from Google in particular places. I'll stop that accusation there. I haven't been able to put many names to streets in Cowra because I don't travel through there often. If the streets are traced from sources which shouldn't have been used, then of course they should be deleted as Nick suggests. Thanks for the info. If turn out to be the first one there collecting names, I'll keep the GPS trace on and realign the streets from that (attributing source=survey at the same time). John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing streets in Sydney
Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: A lot of those streets were placed by a particular person whom I know traced from Google in particular places. I'll stop that accusation there. I haven't been able to put many names to streets in Cowra because I don't travel through there often. I do, and I've been meaning to name all the streets. Of course I haven't yet done so. Next trip will be in a week, but it will be my daughter's birthday and I don't know if I'll have time. If the streets are traced from sources which shouldn't have been used, then of course they should be deleted as Nick suggests. I am unaware of the sources used for mapping Cowra. If I collect all the street names I'll also have GPS traces to match. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
