[OSM-talk] Is *just* tracing useful?
osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk
Fri Sep 7 09:17:51 BST 2007
On 07/09/07, Tom Chance <tom at acrewoods.net> wrote:
> On Friday 07 September 2007 00:08:30 Dave Stubbs wrote:
> > Now my question is this: is this tracing actually useful?
> > From my mapping perspective:
> > - it makes it much harder to see what needs doing
> > - when loaded onto my GPS the traced stuff becomes very difficult to
> > distinguish, so it takes me longer and I also miss stuff because I
> > it's been done.
> > - entering the data takes longer because I have to fix all the oneway
> > streets, and the ways that don't follow the roads, the ways that aren't
> > roads, and all the bits that were missed anyway... it's much quicker to
> > generate from scratch correctly
> > In other words, I'd rather people didn't do it!
> I concur, in the area I've been mapping I usually end up spending more
> deleting old segments and waysthan I do putting mine in from scratch.
> you've been there you just don't know what the roads are like.
> I'm sure some people do it with the intention of then visiting the area,
> so it
> can't all be bad. But where I've been working it looks like people have
> randomly added odd bits of roads, parks, etc.
Yeah, there's some people tracing an area, then printing that out so that
when they go out they can fill in the names easily and have a rough idea
where the roads will be and their distribution. They then go home and fix
anything they've done wrong. This seems a valid mapping technique to me, and
won't show up on my map unless they've been very ambitious with the tracing
and is taking longer than they hoped!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk