Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
Dale, I don't think it's reasonable to expect mappers to continually go over the areas they have contributed to in order to remove obosolete ways bulk-loaded over their own. I think it best to hold off more editing untill the last tiger import is complete. Heck - the 2015 bulk upload may even hav

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
Steve What would constitute "significant edits? Let's say I fix up the interstate for the entire length of its run through a county but make no other improvements. Are these "significant edits or would I find Tiger's version of an interstate reapplied over my own. _

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Dale Puch
Obviously some heated feelings involved for some regarding their hard work being messed up. This is understandable, and I believe understood by Dave as well. To my knowledge the original tiger, and plans for this import will not delete ANY user created ways. That is why there are 2 ways in some a

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread SteveC
Dave the positional accuracy of the 'new' TIGER stuff I hear is substantially better across the board. Some suggestions: Build a list of counties which have not had substantial edits to see if they can be dropped for the new stuff? Import all the TIGER 2007 addressing stuff in the Frederik

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
Please see Golden Canyon Road in Death Valley. It shows the problems with auto uploads. I've put my original response in a diary entry. Not sure why it kept getting truncated. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.o

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
I'll keep trying one paragraph at at time if necessary - sorry 'bout this. If it fails then I'll write a diary entry. >From my own experience I noticed some problems as well. My travels took me through my second most favourite place on earth - Death Valley. When I went to edit in the tracks I no

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
3rd try - last two posts apprear to have been truncated. "Again, let's calm down a little bit. Were you around for the last import? Did you see how I handled data conflicts in that one? Was there a problem there that needs fixing this time around?" Yes I think there were problems. There ha

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
I'll try again - last post appreas to have been truncated. "Again, let's calm down a little bit. Were you around for the last import? Did you see how I handled data conflicts in that one? Was there a problem there that needs fixing this time around?" Yes I think there were problems. There h

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
"Again, let's calm down a little bit. Were you around for the last import? Did you see how I handled data conflicts in that one? Was there a problem there that needs fixing this time around?" Yes I think there were problems. There have been some diary entries bemoaning the fact that their edit

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Dave Hansen
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 22:09 +1100, Nick Hocking wrote: > Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not > erase or be overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits. > On my last US trip I've got about 6000 miles of gps tracks. I've only > edited in a few hundred miles

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Matthias Julius
Russ Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ian Dees writes: > > I don't agree. If the "reviewed" flag was changed to yes without any change > > to the imported data, then that means the new TIGER data will be better > than > > the old ("reviewed") data. > > Or worse. Different != improved. Th

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Russ Nelson
Ian Dees writes: > I don't agree. If the "reviewed" flag was changed to yes without any change > to the imported data, then that means the new TIGER data will be better than > the old ("reviewed") data. Or worse. Different != improved. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com | Unr

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Ian Dees
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Russ Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nick Hocking writes: > > Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not erase > or be > > overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits. > > I'm not Dave, but I'm quite sure that 1) he won't be sm

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Russ Nelson
Nick Hocking writes: > Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not erase or be > overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits. I'm not Dave, but I'm quite sure that 1) he won't be smashing any user edits, and 2) I don't support the smashing of my edits either. I've

[Talk-us] Tiger 2007 Data

2008-10-24 Thread Nick Hocking
Hi Dave, Can you confirm that any bulk upload of Tiger 2007 date will not erase or be overlaid over/under/alongside any existing user edits. On my last US trip I've got about 6000 miles of gps tracks. I've only edited in a few hundred miles of them so far but am reluctant to do any more work if