> > A map without streams and rivers is not real to me. That's where the > NHD import comes in. After the import, I frequently update the > actual hydrography features for changes caused by new construction. Not a > waste of time to me, and the map is useless without those hydro landmarks. > I certainly wouldn't be slogging up thousands of streams and rivers - most > of which are on private property - trying to map any of them myself. >
I started an import of the rivers, streams, waterbodies, park trails, forest trails, and national park and forest boundaries in the upper left corner of Washington before the NHD importing got entirely underway. I made some--what I now consider to be--pretty big mistakes, but it would have been impossible to actually go and survey all of that data. And with there being 10 mappers on the Olympic Peninsula (about half the size of Massachusetts, 2,000 mi^2 smaller than Hawaii) it would have taken decades, not years. At least now the data is there, mostly correct and can be easily fixed. Aside from that, I'll agree that importing just because some data is > available is not good, and firsthand survey data is much more valuable. > I think everyone feels this way. I've got some cool species range data but I'm not going to toss it up on OSM geocommons, sure, but there's no reason for that to be in OSM at this time. I get particularly irked when I hear people wanting to spend time and effort importing all of the Wal-marts or whatever (Walmart should import Walmart, it's in their best interests to have RVers find them, so let them import and maintain their locations). That being said, I'd not stop or even try to discourage anyone if it's relevant data.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
