On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
> The tree cover issue is precisely why many states that have seasons have a
> recurrent leaf-off (sometimes even in IR) imaging program.
>
> Arkansas has their imagery, along with a raft of other open data, available
> on Geostor as a WMS servi
You had me all excited to see Washington in your list, turns out it's DC. I
am impressed with the quality of work the locals are doing. Very few ways
in your extract.
Do you have your process document anywhere so we can reproduce the results
for other areas?
Clifford
--
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle
Washington State just completed a aerial imagery program this spring, a
leaf-off program. It was funded by individual sources so the rasters aren't
available. Fortunately, many of the counties have open data with road
centerlines.
Clifford
--
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap:
The tree cover issue is precisely why many states that have seasons have a
recurrent leaf-off (sometimes even in IR) imaging program.
Arkansas has their imagery, along with a raft of other open data, available on
Geostor as a WMS service that should be usable in JOSM and also as downloadable
d
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:00 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea
wrote:
> Thank you, Tod. Yes, I MIGHT find a VERY SELECT SUBSET of these data
> SOMEWHAT useful, as minor amounts of them seem to be accurate and
> more-up-to-date enough to introduce into OSM. But certainly not using any
> sort of automat
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:00 AM, OSM Volunteer stevea <
stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote:
> Thank you, Tod. Yes, I MIGHT find a VERY SELECT SUBSET of these data
> SOMEWHAT useful, as minor amounts of them seem to be accurate and
> more-up-to-date enough to introduce into OSM. But certainly not
Thank you, Tod. Yes, I MIGHT find a VERY SELECT SUBSET of these data SOMEWHAT
useful, as minor amounts of them seem to be accurate and more-up-to-date enough
to introduce into OSM. But certainly not using any sort of automated method.
Essentially, every single datum would need to be human-rev
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:40 AM, Badita Florin
wrote:
...
> Did not had time to look at each individual state, but i will share the
> insight for Arizona :
> Feel free to look at the other states.
> And please, if you want me to run this on any public dataset, just tell
> me, I will help you crea
In the area I now live in California, my first impression looking at this is
that the data is garbage. It looks to me that blindly importing would
re-introduce TIGER errors that have been successfully removed. Looking at a
tiny area in Arizona where my family still has a house, it is not much be
I don't know where all of this is going, and wanted to see for myself, so I
downloaded the California file (the largest one of all) and zoomed in on where
I live and am most familiar with, Santa Cruz County. Thank you for providing
the ten states worth of translated data for us to take a look.
On 10/12/2017 9:52 AM, Ian Dees wrote:
The vast majority of roads seem to be correctly missing from OSM.
Along that line of thought - for cases where local government data is
not open, I'd find it useful to detect where a name changed in TIGER
from previous year, or a road was added.
_
dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-mr
>> cc-centerlines
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Ian Dees
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:25 AM
>> *To: *Badita Florin
>> *Cc: *talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap
&
e
>
>
>
> *From: *Ian Dees
> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:25 AM
> *To: *Badita Florin
> *Cc: *talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap
> *Subject: *Re: [Talk-us] Comparing Tiger 2017 dataset with OSM in a
> automatedway.
>
>
>
> It would be interest
-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Comparing Tiger 2017 dataset with OSM in a automatedway.
It would be interesting to see what differences CYGNUS would turn up. What
would the output of CYGNUS be?
I put together the TIGER 2017 layer that's in the editors right now.
14 matches
Mail list logo
