You'll beat us on numbers, that's true. Maybe the problem that I see is not so much the imports, but the maintenance of all that data (imported or manually added).
Who is going to see all those mistakes, changes, etc. when all the data is there ? The one that I saw was a building in a forest. That's easy to spot when it is demolished. But how will you notice that the shape of a building is incorrect when there are thousands of buildings? At this moment, most communities are still adding data, the Dutch import speeds up this process, so the Dutch community will be in the next phase before the others. You can rely on other parties (BAG) for the updates, but will they catch mistakes ? The building I'm talking about is demolished 2 or 3 years ago. Why was the BAG not updated yet ? Will people be looking for mistakes when all data seems to be there ? I see a similar problem with the Belgian walking networks. The Flemish Tourism office doesn't know (at least that seems so) that changes are made to the network. I don't know who makes those changes then. So they ask the public to report the changes. So just relying on them (if we would be allowed), would immediately give us all routes, but with a lot of mistakes. People will think the data is there, but will they be willing to actively search for mistakes ? So the challenge is to find people that want to find those mistakes. Less interesting than adding new data. I'm looking forward to see how the Dutch community is going to tackle this. regards m On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Johan C <osm...@gmail.com> wrote: > <Anyway this is not doing anything positive for my feelings on imports.> > > In terms of having data for a routing engine (like OsmAnd) a definition > can be that any missing address in a country is an error. The number of > missing addresses in the Netherlands is calculated recently: on a total of > approx. 8,5 million addresses 60.000 are missing at the moment (0,7% > error). How does that compare to Belgium or Germany? > > > > > 2014-10-05 19:49 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com>: > >> >> On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Johan C <osm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The BAG should contain the correct building outline, since this is >>> Cadastral information, nowadays updated very often. But as any database, >>> the BAG might incidentally have errors. Satellite imagery though is at risk >>> of being well outdated. So in these cases it's possibly best to have groun >>> truth info to determine the correct building outline. >> >> >> Funny that Florian found an error, and that I also found 2. And that for >> holiday mappers. :-) >> Anyway this is not doing anything positive for my feelings on imports. >> >> regards >> >> m >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-nl mailing list >> Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-nl mailing list > Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
