<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 17, 2021, 22:08 by tomasstraupis@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div> * absolutely no control on quality (of anything: tagging schema,<br></div><div>data itself, even general direction)<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">That is not true at all.<br></div><div dir="auto">See <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_assurance">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_assurance</a><br></div><div dir="auto">for example <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator</a><br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><br></div><div> And at the same time we have:<br></div><div> * governments opening their data at a very fast pace, and their data<br></div><div>is homogenous - stable and very usable (curated by professionals with<br></div><div>a clear knowledge on how and where the data is used)<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Maybe it is true for some specific datasets or specific countries.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you work with government data and ended with this impression<br></div><div dir="auto">you either are lucky or have unusually competent government<br></div><div dir="auto">in this area.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But not true in general. Just few recent examples that I encountered:<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">London published some datasets about planning permissions.<br></div><div dir="auto">With empty polygon field, because something broke down <br></div><div dir="auto">(at least centroid is still included).<br></div><div dir="auto">Address data is in free form format, UPRN codes often missing etc etc.<br></div><div dir="auto"><a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/digital-planning/planning-london-datahub" target="_blank">https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/digital-planning/planning-london-datahub</a><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Poland published government data about buildings, with some<br></div><div dir="auto">garages marked as churches, swimming pools marked as garages.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Illegal buildings are missing as it was based on construction permits.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Poland government address data in some places have the same <br></div><div dir="auto">address multiple times (record was 11 repetitions I think)?<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Australia government data has dried-out rivers present as still<br></div><div dir="auto">flowing in official datasets.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Just see at documented imports in OSM to discover many more cases of<br></div><div dir="auto">broken data and how the handled it.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>other global datasets are emerging. look at natural earth dataset<br></div><div dir="auto">(yes, it is for the time being for small scale maps only), but they've<br></div><div>learned OSM mistakes very well: they DO accept anybody to map, but<br></div><div>results are curated by professionals and new mappers are prepared<br></div><div>before doing anything.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">It is not coincidence that "all changes are reviewed" is done for a <br></div><div dir="auto">"small scale maps only".<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Their workflow would not work at all at OSM scale.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div> </body>
</html>