On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
One thing I do not understand is why the script catches the false
positive node 560176247 [1] (just an example, there are more like this
one).
Anyone with some SQL savvy care to look into that?
I looked at those in
On 5/29/2012 6:04 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
The landuse import for Georgia (which IMO is poor-quality and should be
deleted, but that's not going to happen) has a bunch of areas tagged as
note = Forested Wetland with no useful natural=* tags (since
natural=wood and natural=wetland both apply).
On 5/30/2012 6:19 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
There's absolutely no reason to rush. Data that's been sitting in OSM
for *years* without even being noticed as a problem
I noticed it as a problem about a year ago.
___
Talk-us mailing list
I think Frederik just meant not to rush between bringing it to the list
attention and making the bulk changes.
It's sort of like posting out of the blue: I have this import I was
working on for a year, if no one objects I'll upload it today.
It is all about giving others the time to look and
4 matches
Mail list logo
