Has anyone discussed the creation of a comprehensiveness or level of
detail rating? What I mean by this is different from a quality rating
or metric, as that is a very difficult task which entails comparison
against authoritative sources or some other process, and different
from the general
2011/5/6 Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com:
Has anyone discussed the creation of a comprehensiveness or level of
detail rating? What I mean by this is different from a quality rating
or metric, as that is a very difficult task which entails comparison
against authoritative sources or some other
I think it makes sense to have several rating systems, this is
specific for an individual road, but we can also have one for trails,
another for POIs, etc, and yet another for country-level details. For
example, the Philippines wiki project created a level of detail rating
for the whole country,
Josh Doe wrote:
Here's a shot at a few levels, with a slight orientation towards
routing, probably the most common use of road data:
Level 0:
Road way present and connected to other ways, and tagged at least with
highway=road if classification is unknown
Level 1:
Name and classification
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Some physical keys could be added to the list, such as width and lanes.
However, I wonder whether a total ordering is the best approach.
Look at the physical descriptions from your example (bridges, tunnels,
surface).
5 matches
Mail list logo
