On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. I believe that Richard was speaking about TIGER in the sense of the style of import, rather than about the dataset itself. The issues around TIGER were that it gave us a boost initially, but we've been also dealing with the consequences of that import for years, and I think Richard is suggesting that we consider our actions carefully. > 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). Yes, but it's an excellent point- one that should go along with any data import. More than that, I'd like to see the imports follow a process (one which I was writing up about the TIGER expansion), but here's the rough outline: 1. Initial announcement of interest (I'd like to do ___ and either I have the script or data to do so). Ask the community if there's interest/objections. (have some waiting/feedback period) 2. If there's interest and no serious objections, post the data files and scripts for testing. (have some waiting/feedback period) 3. Have a formal code review (as we're doing tonight for the TIGER expansion bot). 4. Have a "last call. (have a waiting/patch subimission period) 5. Do the automated edit process. - Serge _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us