On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > First of all, can we agree as a group to hold off on importing or >> > applying >> > any TIGER 2010 data until we come up with a way to apply changes in a >> > uniform and somewhat organized manner? >> >> I don't see why TIGER 2010 should be treated differently from any >> other imports. If you have data that you're sure is more accurate >> than what's already there, and are using well-established tags, then >> go ahead and import. If you're not sure if your data is more accurate >> than what's already there, don't import. If you are making up your >> own tags, then talk about it first. > > I can't think of any US, national-level imports (other than the original > TIGER import, perhaps) that have gone well.
That seems to me like a good argument *against* importing TIGER in a uniform and somewhat organized manner. > In the areas I've spot-checked, TIGER 2010 has better resolution and more > road data than untouched TIGER-imported OSM data. How much of that is there, anyway? _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
