Russ Nelson <nel...@crynwr.com> writes: > Michal Migurski writes: > > Also, what's the deal with the Massachusetts TIGER import? > > Massachusetts had already made an improved version of the TIGER data, > so the decision was made to import that instead.
I'm not sure it's a version of the TIGER data, but early on (I have no reason to doubt Russ's date), road data was imported from MassGIS. The origin of the data was "EOT", at the time Executive Office of Transportation, and now "MassDOT", more conventionally named. This data is generally of quite high quality. There were a few issues, now almost entirely behind us: Oneway roads were tagged oneway=yes, but the direction was unknown. This was apparently due to licensing confusion, but for the most part humans have fixed up the directions and removed the ~fixme:unreviewed-oneway tag. A few towns weren't imported. I think they either have been now, with manual merging, or mostly hand mapped. There are a very small number of errors, to the point when if you find an error in the massgis/eot data it's remarkable. (Of course there are new roads built since the dataset; that's not really an error.) In my town I have found exactly one issue: a pair of phantom road and a misnamed real road nearby. One can nitpick about the geometry quality at the junction of exit ramps and regular roads. Other than that, it's excellent. That said, the notion of identifying areas that haven't had the road geometry touched since the import. But, one shouldn't conclude that not touching the roads means they are wrong. I've generally only touched roads in my town to add connections to driveways. But, I've verified that many more are right, by watching a garmin with osm while driving, and looking at imagery in JOSM. On the other hand, a whole town with almost no changes probably has had little human attention.
pgpwxWk8NFro2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
