Chris Hill <o...@...> writes: >Please don't import the Draco database into OSM. The quality is very >dubious in places. The original FoIA data that it is based on is very, >very general. They have to be surveyed on the ground to confirm that >they are even within 200m.
I acknowledge your and Andy Allan's concerns. I will do some auditing on the data (by comparing non-OSM-based Dracos data with what's currently in OSM) and report back. There are several different components to the Dracos data which can be imported separately. Where a Dracos user has simply added info such as collection times to an existing postbox node that came from OSM, this is more likely to be reliable. If a postbox exists in the Dracos list but is not in OSM at all, then at a minimum this indicates an area to be surveyed. I do not propose to uncritically suck all the Dracos postbox data into OSM but rather to reconcile the two with plenty of sanity checks. In my test import of E10 and E17, almost all of the changes were adding information to existing OSM postbox nodes, with only a handful of missing postboxes to add (which I am happy to survey myself). Where Dracos and OSM disagree, the OSM data is left alone. Anyway, I'll let you know the results of the audit; if the location data really is as bad as you say, I won't enter it into OSM. -- Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
