On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:10 PM, James U <jumba...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have to say that after importing a large amount of NHD data (most of NC > and MN) that it is of varying quality, as was the preexisting water related > data already on the server. In general, I agree with Ian that it is higher > quality (both resolution and accuracy) than the preexisting data that > largely consisted of quickly drawn Yahoo traces. I saw very little evidence > of on the ground surveying of these features and don't think the import > will hinder most people from participating in OSM writ large.
On the other hand, my (extremely limited) experience is that the aerial water traces for Disney World were superior to the NHD import (so I quickly deleted all the dupes from NHD). But the swamps were a lot more useful, since you can't really tell if something's swampy without physically going there. I love how all these "islands" suddenly made sense: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.29&lon=-81.5191&zoom=14&layers=M _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
