> From: Alan Mintz [mailto:alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 3:06 PM
> To: talk...@openstreetmap.org; imports@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Fresno castradal imports
>
> At 2012-05-04 01:37, Paul Norman wrote:
> >See
> >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/
At 2012-05-04 01:37, Paul Norman wrote:
See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-April/008032.html
for the full discussion around the removal
In summary:
- The Fresno import has a number of issues
- No one is opposed to removal if there are no easier options for cleaning
up the
At 2012-05-04 11:47, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
>> From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org]
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Fresno castradal imports
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
>> More information isn't necessarily bad;
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Paul Johnson
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Ian Dees wrote:
> >> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
> >>
> >> > Do
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Ian Dees wrote:
> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
>
> > Do those individual polygons have any useful information on them
> (addresses,
> > for example)? If so, we should generate addr poi
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
>
> Do those individual polygons have any useful information on them (addresses,
> for example)? If so, we should generate addr points from their centroids.
>
> Either way, we could save useful OSM information by creating a new polygon
> from the out
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
> > From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org]
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Fresno castradal imports
> >
> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
> > > See
> > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-April/008032
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> More information isn't necessarily bad; I think it might be better to
> try to refine the imported data over time if possible.
>
>
If it hasn't been touched in years than obviously no one is doing it.
bottom line it's stale data there is no
> From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org]
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Fresno castradal imports
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
> > See
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-April/008032.htm
> > l for the full discussion around the removal
> >
> > In
See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-April/008032.html
for the full discussion around the removal
In summary:
- The Fresno import has a number of issues
- No one is opposed to removal if there are no easier options for cleaning
up the data
- No one has proposed an easier optio
10 matches
Mail list logo