To the extent that the address points are not duplicates of existing address
nodes, unconflated address nodes are a perfectly legitimate means of mapping
and do not need to be "fixed." Even if the address exists on a poly, it's still
fine as long as the node is marking something meaningful, like the front door
of the building. Some have in the past gone so far to say that nodes are
preferable since it allows routers for the differently abled to provide
door-to-door guidance.
-Nathan
On July 21, 2018 2:39:36 PM EDT, James Umbanhowar <jumba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Sorry, I just saw this. Please do not upload this, yet. You have not
>responded to any of the feedback that I have given. Instead you have
>chosen to just upload all the points into the database and then correct
>the database afterwards.
>
>Please, instead, break this into smaller areas and then conflate the
>points with existing objects and then upload. From what I can tell,
>this would be easiest done with the Tasking Manager.
>
>Also, I have already signalled my willingness to help with this task
>and using the tasking manager would allow me and possibly others to
>help.
>
>Thank you,
>
>James
>
>
>
>On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 23:42 -0400, Leif Rasmussen wrote:
>> Hi everyone!
>I have finally verified the license on the Chatham
>> County, NC address data which includes about 44,000 address points.
>> It is public domain except for that it has a "no direct resale"
>> policy that allows indirect resale (includes other data), which is
>> compatible with OSM. Durham County, which uses the ODbL has also
>> produced address data. I will be completing both the imports this
>> weekend. Some discussion has taken place about adding buildings in
>> Durham at the same time as the import, but to keep everything more
>> simple, I have decided on just adding nodes for now and then merging
>> with buildings later. This would reduce complexity and help
>> everything run more smoothly. I will upload all of the data alone.
>> This helps keep everything more simple, leading to fewer mistakes. I
>> do not see very much benefit to having several account all importing
>> the data.
>
>Details:
>Size of both imports combined: 190,000 addresses
>Date of upload: Saterday and Sunday, 21st and 22nd of July, 2018
>Type of import: One time with JOSM in 20 changesets.
>Account: LeifRasmussen_import
>
>Wiki pages:
>Durham County
>Chatham County
>
>Please let me know of any concerns of ideas! I would love to improve
>the import as much as I can.
>Thanks!
>Leif Rasmussen
>
>_______________________________________________
>Imports mailing list
>impo...@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
