Re: [Talk-us] mapping job - unconnected _link roads
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: One thing I do not understand is why the script catches the false positive node 560176247 [1] (just an example, there are more like this one). Anyone with some SQL savvy care to look into that? I looked at those in Western Washington but only one required fixing. Some of the false positives were freeway links that are shown as disused=yes. They were on freeways that abruptly ended. Adding in sql code to omit disused=yes would catch some. Most of the other false positives were at connections between motorway links and the main freeway. Not sure I understand why. I couldn't see a pattern for those. Only one possibility comes to mind - the nodes were connected after you grabbed the data. Clifford ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] proposed automated edit: forested wetlands
On 5/29/2012 6:04 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: The landuse import for Georgia (which IMO is poor-quality and should be deleted, but that's not going to happen) has a bunch of areas tagged as note = Forested Wetland with no useful natural=* tags (since natural=wood and natural=wetland both apply). Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/31457349 I propose to fix these. But what would be the best tags to use? Would natural=wetland wetland=swamp (An area of waterlogged forest, with dense vegetation.) be correct? If there are no objections, I'm going to do this sometime today. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] proposed automated edit: forested wetlands
On 5/30/2012 6:19 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: There's absolutely no reason to rush. Data that's been sitting in OSM for *years* without even being noticed as a problem I noticed it as a problem about a year ago. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] proposed automated edit: forested wetlands
I think Frederik just meant not to rush between bringing it to the list attention and making the bulk changes. It's sort of like posting out of the blue: I have this import I was working on for a year, if no one objects I'll upload it today. It is all about giving others the time to look and think it over then respond. That said, your tagging suggestion seems sound as per http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwetland for those who do not feel like searching for it. Dale On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 7:08 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote: On 5/30/2012 6:19 AM, *Frederik* Ramm wrote: There's absolutely no reason to rush. Data that's been sitting in OSM for *years* without even being noticed as a problem I noticed it as a problem about a year ago. __**_ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
