On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>wrote:
> Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > > It looks pretty good from what I saw, with the obvious exception > > that newer homes aren't tagged. I'm going to clean up my code > > a bit and stick it up on github somewhere. > > If you chaps are all dead set on doing another massive TIGER import - hey, > it's your funeral - could I at least urge a little caution on the > practicalities of it all? > I really don't want to support a complete TIGER address import unless our effort at finding "real" local addressing data fails in some places. > Just having a look at the .osm file posted here, for example, the street > names are all unexpanded: Washington St, Park Ave, Deer Run Ln, etc. There > have been about 937 threads about expanding TIGER street names since the > initial import and it would be a shame to fall into the same hole again. > Just about all the data I've seen is unexpanded. We'll probably have to deal with that on a per-county basis (assuming we're not importing TIGER). > > I'm also very very doubtful about the value of importing city, state and > (!) > country: if we don't have polygons for all of those already, then we really > should. Importing n billion nodes into the States which all say "hey, this > is in the States" will bloat the database and hammer download speeds for > absolutely no gain whatsoever. I think that anything beyond house number, street, and maybe city would be superfluous and shouldn't be included in addressing imports and will try to advocate for that.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us