[OSM-dev] Data source for robot

[Peter Budny]

Andy Allan <gravitystorm at gmail.com> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Peter Budny <peterb at gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>> Relations are the cleaner solution here.  You /could/ accomplish the
>> same thing with regular tags, but who wants to see symbol=*, symbol_1=*,
>> symbol_2=*, etc. on every way in a city?  (Or worse, a giant symbol=*
>> tag with semicolon-separated URLs?)
>
> Great. So the way to fix this is to first make the data consumed. I'd
> suggest working on osm2pgsql so that it supports route relations
> cleanly, as you've described. Then, you can sit back and let the
> community take advantage of the new rendering system, and implement
> route relations themselves in whichever fashion motivates them the
> most.

I'd love to work on that... later, when I'm not working
60-hour weeks trying to graduate.  Not right now.

> Also, I'd advise you to leave TIGER data to one side. A very high
> percentage of major roads in OSM in the US have been edited, many
> multiple times

What about the minor roads?  State Roads are exactly the ones that
aren't major, and there are a lot of them.  Most states have at least
several hundred, and a few like Kentucky and Texas have more than 6000.
That's a /minimum/ estimate of 20,000 roads, most of which haven't been
touched because they're in rural areas.
-- 
Peter Budny  \
Georgia Tech  \
CS PhD student \