Re: [OSM-talk] OSM TIGER-based map quality

2008-04-04 Thread Jonathan W. Lowe
On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 14:08 -0400, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:53:43AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 13:51 -0400, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:31:11AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 09:12

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM TIGER-based map quality

2008-04-04 Thread Jonathan W. Lowe
On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 07:05 -0400, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 08:29:56AM +0000, Jonathan W. Lowe wrote: > > When overlaying OSM with the recently available TIGER 2007 shapefile > > data for Census Blocks in Alameda County (California), I'm encounterin

[OSM-talk] OSM TIGER-based map quality

2008-04-04 Thread Jonathan W. Lowe
When overlaying OSM with the recently available TIGER 2007 shapefile data for Census Blocks in Alameda County (California), I'm encountering both an offset and difference in relative position of the linework. In short, OSM's data looks a lot more accurate and consistent -- streets that should be s