On 12 Nov 2009, at 8:28 , Ian Dees wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Apollinaris Schoell <ascho...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > On 12 Nov 2009, at 6:14 , Andy Allan wrote: > > > I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the > > initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up > > later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the > last 6 > > months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to > > remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than > > that to import them! > > > > +10 > Give everyone a chance to work in a constructive way and don't expect > others to clean the mess bad import left behind. > No wonder there are only few motivated mappers in US. In Canada they > do a much better job in integrating the community and don't import > every shape file blindly just because it's available. > > Not to start a holy war over what community is better, but there > weren't a whole lot of mappers in the US (at least on talk or talk- > us) when we started doing the TIGER import…
It's not about better community. The point is an empty map doesn't attract average mappers. someone ambitious needs to start the whole thing. A nearly finished map doesn't attract the ambitious mappers. A broken map doesn't attract either one. Imports help with the first challenge. Bad imports not at all. Tiger import was very useful and done in the best way known at that time. but has many problems. technical and community wise. We shouldn't make the same mistakes again just to fill the database. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
