<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Nov 14, 2020, 12:34 by mgl.branco@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=""><div dir="ltr"><div class=""><div dir="ltr"><div>I am not sure which kind of "reduction" you are speaking about, if it could make the difference of a whole village being included or excluded I am sure that it is not an acceptable level of reduction/tolerance. I would rather see it the opposite way: not so unlikely that the official data has already been reduced compared to the (usually very precise "internal" official data), before publishing it as open data, and there might be some resulting details which could be seen as problematic on the micro level (e.g. if a road or a waterway is part of the area or not, or maybe is after the simplification half in half out, etc.) Also these areas will be delimited by other features (roads, fields, settlements, waterways, etc.), and ideally there boundaries in OSM should match with the representation of these things in OSM (this means more consistency as matching the exact same coordinates, which will be relating to official data. Hopefully these differences are small anyway, but a few meters can already make the difference whether a road or a stream is included or excluded, or is half in half out.<br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div> <br></div><div>I meant to manually simplify areas. But as you say, I think that's not acceptable: we need to import those areas as they are in the shapefiles. We are speaking about a official dataset that is constantly used in local administration to decide anything (ie. if a house, road... is inside a natural park or not and if requires, can be granted something...).<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div>Substantial changes are unwanted. But note that some shapefiles have unneded extra nodes,<br></div><div>I have seen simple rectangle building mapped with 1200 nodes where 4 would describe the same<br></div><div>shape.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Such simplification are desirable and should be done also here if needed and possible without<br></div><div>any real data loss.<br></div><div><br></div> </body>
</html>