On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:16:26 -0500, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> There's nothing wrong with doing point-level address imports. The only
>> thing I would suggest is ensuring that we connect those points ways or
>> whatever to the roads that represent the
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Peter Batty wrote:
>> And
>> like I said, the two aren't incompatible, you can use a simpler approach on
>> the basic TIGER import (however we decide to implement it), and add data in
>> Karlsruhe format if you want to add more precise addresses later.
But we kn
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 10:05 PM, SteveC wrote:
>> So you put the house numbers on the nodes and then what happens with them
>> all when you switch the way
>> direction?
>
> Nothing.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.051148&lon=-82.552442&zo
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 10:05 PM, SteveC wrote:
> So you put the house numbers on the nodes and then what happens with them all
> when you switch the way
> direction?
Nothing.
> Every editor has to know to reorder the left and right hand numbers?
Nope. Up/Forward is defined as the direction i
On Nov 15, 2009, at 8:03 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Peter Batty wrote:
>> I think the Karlsruhe schema is good where you are trying to model addresses
>> pretty precisely and you're not expecting major updates to the street
>> network. But I think with the TIGER data w
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Peter Batty wrote:
> I think the Karlsruhe schema is good where you are trying to model addresses
> pretty precisely and you're not expecting major updates to the street
> network. But I think with the TIGER data we have a different situation. And
> like I said, th
I suspect the Karlsruhe schema is a bit like the license change. Everyone
thinks they have a better idea, and it will take 3 weeks of back and forth to
go over it before they figure out that it's the best (or, least worst) way
forward... but by then another 3 people who need convincing pop up...
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 18:02 -0700, Peter Batty wrote:
> I would be interested in being on the USA conversion team - how do I
> sign up? (I am in Denver incidentally
Perhaps someone should set up a wiki page of interested parties. We
also need to start recording some of the consensus that's coming
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Peter Batty wrote:
> I'm coming a bit late to this debate, but I just wanted to raise a fairly
> basic question, which is whether the Karlsruhe schema is the best one to use
> in the situation we find ourselves in with TIGER, where quite a bit of data
> cleanup is
For a single county or jurisdiction, if you delete the TIGER data and
import more accurate local data, what do you do at the boundaries?
County/Stare data sets I've seen usually get cut off +/- a few hundred
feet (if that) from the boundary. Does somebody go through and make
them fit/connect
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> There's nothing wrong with doing point-level address imports. The only
> thing I would suggest is ensuring that we connect those points ways or
> whatever to the roads that represent them somehow.
1) Why?
2) Are you planning on doing that wi
Dan,
Alexandria gave us permission to import their data but still wanted
the 100 dollar CD fee. Someone paid that and we do have the data.
As far as I know nobody has asked Fairfax County, but I figured making
D.C. look nice with a combination of mapping and importing would be a
strong tool
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 18:54 -0500, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 18:11 -0500, Kate Chapman wrote:
> >> What's wrong with doing automated addressing imports in situations
> >> where we have point level address data?
> >
> > The issue
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 18:11 -0500, Kate Chapman wrote:
>> What's wrong with doing automated addressing imports in situations
>> where we have point level address data?
>
> The issue is that it may not line up with the roads at all.
Well, addre
Hi Dan,
Both manual and donated data. I've been addressing my neighborhood in
Virginia but Washington D.C. donated point level addresses.
Kate Chapman
On Nov 15, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Dan Putler
wrote:
> Hi Kate,
>
> How have the address points been obtained? From OSM users? The Census
> Bure
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 18:28 -0500, Kate Chapman wrote:
> Maybe I'm confused about the address versus road information. I would
> think the address point would be the front door of the building and
> would not be a relation to the road. So the node of the address and
> the way of the road would no
Dave,
Understood, I would envision it being a partially manual and partially
automated process.
Maybe I'm confused about the address versus road information. I would think
the address point would be the front door of the building and would not be a
relation to the road. So the node of the addre
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 18:11 -0500, Kate Chapman wrote:
> What's wrong with doing automated addressing imports in situations
> where we have point level address data?
The issue is that it may not line up with the roads at all. We also
need to ensure that we *find* the roads to which it refers to e
Dan,
What's wrong with doing automated addressing imports in situations where we
have point level address data? Or are you just referring to not importing
the addressing that is available for the Tiger data?
Kate Chapman
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-1
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 14:49 -0800, Dan Putler wrote:
> The
> upshot, for a number of US counties you would rather use the county
> centerline road data rather than TIGER data as the basis of the
> import.
That's really good news.
This is exactly what happened for Massachusetts. They had better d
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 14:33 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> Yeah, and that does sound like a really nice way to do it, especially
>> when there is existing data.
>
> Anybody want to be on the USA "conversion team"? :)
Absolutely.
___
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 14:33 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Yeah, and that does sound like a really nice way to do it, especially
> when there is existing data.
Anybody want to be on the USA "conversion team"? :)
-- Dave
___
Imports mailing list
Imports
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 14:25 -0800, Sam Vekemans wrote:
> 1 - A few people (we can call the data conversion team) are in charge
> of taking the data in it's source form (in this case SHP) We use the
> tools availble (shp-to-osm.jar and/or shp2osm.py) and are the ones who
> create a set of 'rules' li
Hi Dave,
I'll bud in for a moment :) .. with my 2 Canadian pennies
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 10:59 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > If we can come up with a scheme for getting the addressing imported in
> a
> > > sane fash
Hi All,
A quick not to let you all know that Frank Steggink is now the main
developer of the canvec-to-osm script.
He has been working on the geobase2osm import and knows python script &
postGIS database MUCH better than i do.
If anyone wants to see this verson it's available here
http://www.medi
Ok,
the few areas wich could be imported automatically have been imported.
The rest will have to go by hand because most of them are simply
missing in OSM.
Unless someone finds a clever algorithm to determine the extend of a
village and estimate borders for it.
I´ll continue working on importing t
26 matches
Mail list logo
