I am generally opposed to importation of parcel data at the individual parcel level. This goes _directly_ to the design of OSM with a non-layered data model and the resultant massive increase in rendered data density.
However, there is much information in local GIS datastores about subdivision and town boundaries which did not come in with the 2005 TiGER import. Given the large number of populated place nodes added from the USGS GNIS, addition of these administrative boundaries directly complements the GNIS node imports, with the resultant enhancement of the relationship between Wikipedia and OSM via the WIWOSM functionality.
There is also information from town charter documents which is not necessarily represented in other GIS resources; such town charter documents refer in places to actual ground artifacts visible during town boundary surveying (such as "...three following described courses and distances: (1) South 63°-05'-40" West, and passing through a 48 inch tulip poplar tree...." from http://charters.delaware.gov/arden.shtml ). If I had the wherewithal, it would be really interesting to following on the ground the boundary details and document them in OSM; this would be an absolutely unique set of data which links written survey descriptions with ground truth, thereby making OSM more physically verifiable than the GIS datasets themselves (in this small data area).
--OSM contributor ceyockey
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
