So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license upgrade:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/umd_subset.osm
That's an extract of the UVM-SAL building footprints I'd like to
import for swathes of MD and PA. My workflow for killing existing
feature conflicts
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:46 AM, William Morris
wboyk...@geosprocket.com wrote:
So here's something to mull over while we all wait for the license upgrade:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23616645/Geosprocket_Share/umd_subset.osm
That's an extract of the UVM-SAL building footprints I'd like to
On 4/2/2012 12:18 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
I think imports (taking a large number of objects from an external
source and placing them in OSM all at once) is bad for the community.
Most of you have heard me say this before. I still have no hard
evidence to prove it. There is also no hard
On 4/2/2012 12:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting
point for local mappers, especially those without a GPS setup.
This is definitely true for those of us in areas with few mappers. OSM
would be largely useless here without the
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On 4/2/2012 12:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting
point for local mappers, especially those without a GPS setup.
This is definitely true for those of us in
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On 4/2/2012 12:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I offer TIGER as counterevidence. It's imperfect but a great starting
point for local mappers,
Hi Bill,
This location (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.29693lon=-75.87369zoom=17layers=M)
has a number of hand editing building outlines. If the data you're looking
at is reasonably close in quality to this area then I think we should
discuss going ahead with the addition of your
7 matches
Mail list logo
