On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:27:27PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 09:43 +0200, vegard wrote: > > > > I see it like this: What could be very useful to have, is a mapping > > between tiger data (old set) and OSM data. It could be to late for this > > round, but an external_id:tiger = XXXX that you'd *never* remove, is a > > good thing. That'll help when updating. > > Umm. We have this. It's called a tlid, and it's already in the data > set. When TIGER objects got combined into a single OSM object, I > preserved this tag. I *also* submitted patches to JOSM to preserve this > tag when merging points and ways. >
Good! I swear, I did mean to write "you might already have this, but...". Well, rest of conversion depends: Is there a (relatively) easy way to do a diff between the old set and the new set? It'd be good to know what is the changes introduced by the new set. The size/amount of those changes will decide the strategy for rest, no? -- - Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk