Hi,
On 12/14/12 05:54, Peter Dobratz wrote:
I guess at this point I would like to pursue reverting these changes,
but I'm not sure about what the next step is.
I've talked to Shimas and reverted the changes.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09
This way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/13694101
is not in ways nor way_nodes tables in a PostGIS replica I have of the OSM
planet, yet it appears in the master DB copy.
I admit that I cannot understand how this might be, and I'm wondering if
anyone has more insight into this
Are you running a snapshot schema, imported with osmosis? If so then
you just discovered the same thing I did a couple of months ago.
Osmosis silently drops ways with less than 2 nodes during import.
(yes, ways with zero nodes exist too) This is because they create an
invalid linestring which can
Yes, yes I am. This explains why, when I checked timestamps on the
zero/one node ways, they were all after the timestamp on the planet file I
pulled to create
the initial planet DB. It also explains the difference between the
Geofabrik errors and the query results returned from the internal
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Jason Remillard
remillard.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
The open space layer from
MassGIS was imported several years ago. This has encouraged people to
map out many of the hiking trails.
How do you make the connection from The MassGIS open space layer was
imported to
* Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com [2012-12-28 16:16 -0500]:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I've used parcel data as a layer in JOSM to trace from. It lets me be a
little
Parcel data in and of itself are not inherently bad to have in OSM as long
as they are filtered and modified before adding. For instance an open space
parcel probably isn't that useful because it is not represented in OSM. It
could be broken up into meadow, wood, scrub, forest, etc. Other parcel
Hi Serge,
To answer your questions, consider the following
- Most of the hiking trails in MA were put in over the imported open
space layer.
- Unlike other countries, It is unacceptably risky to go on a hike on
some random trail that might be on private property. You are likely to
find yourself
On 12/28/2012 4:47 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
* Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com [2012-12-28 16:16 -0500]:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I've used parcel data as a layer in
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
The open space layer from
MassGIS was imported several years ago. This has encouraged people to
map out many of the hiking trails.
How do you make the connection from The MassGIS open space layer was
imported to
Hi,
On 28.12.2012 22:16, Jason Remillard wrote:
So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
open space parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.
I'd say anything that is observable on the ground is fine to map. So if
there's a fence around a
Hi Everybody, Frederik
I have been doing the background layer/tracing over technique.
So, Frederik's, says no to all of these parcels types. Not much gray
area in Frederik criteria.
- True conservation land, land that is owned by a private non-profit
or owned by the town that is supposed to be
Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Brian May b...@mapwise.com wrote:
And as Phil said, sometimes it doesn't make sense to follow the
parcel lines exactly, such as if the parcel boundary extends into a
road and it makes more sense to draw the boundary
Nathan Mixter nmix...@gmail.com writes:
For instance an open space parcel probably isn't that useful because
it is not represented in OSM. It could be broken up into meadow, wood,
scrub, forest, etc.
Jason and I are using 'open space' to mean land that is protected from
development with some
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Frederik Ramm writes:
add it, but if it's just a line in some government database then don't -
Here in the US where you aren't allowed to trespass on private
property except on certain conditions, these line[s] in some
Ian Dees writes:
Frederik's point is that you should only map things that other mappers can
verify or improve on. Since you can't verify borders and boundaries or
otherwise make them any better than the government data after they're
imported, they don't belong in OSM.
Anybody can verify
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Ian Dees writes:
Frederik's point is that you should only map things that other mappers
can
verify or improve on. Since you can't verify borders and boundaries or
otherwise make them any better than the government
Ian Dees writes:
The moment it makes its way in to OSM it becomes incorrect. There is
*absolutely* no way to improve the data once it's in OSM, so it should not
be in OSM. Period.
That's a great theory, but I don't think many people subscribe to
it. Of course anybody can improve on imported
So it sounds like what you folks would want is for data where it's
available, some sort of tracing background layer, or else a per object
import where you could load the data in your editor of choice and
manually select how they go in?
Yes ... especially for 'large' imports. Looking at it from a
19 matches
Mail list logo
