[Imports-us] A proposal for handling the tiger realignment

Brian May bmay at mapwise.com
Wed Aug 14 14:24:27 UTC 2013


OK, thanks for looking into it. That's a bummer. Is it possible "more 
aggressive" techniques would pick these up?

Brian

On 8/13/2013 8:30 PM, Eric Fischer wrote:
> The chain of causality is that, in county 121017,
> node 96238986 (28.763443,-82.534412) can't be moved because it is connected to
> node 96242483 (28.763425,-82.53623) which can't be moved because it is
> connected to
> node 96232423 (28.763424,-82.536941) which can't be moved because it
> is connected to
> node 96223319 (28.763426,-82.537816) which can't be moved because it
> is connected to
> node 96227957 (28.763426,-82.539013) which can't be moved because it
> is connected to
> node 96257290 (28.7604,-82.539025) which is from
> TLID 86219342 (South Spartan Avenue) which no longer appears in TIGER
> apparently because it was renumbered for a route split so that the
> driveway a little bit to the north could be mapped.
>
> I need to add some more debug output so that it's easier to trace why
> something is not moved, but I don't know how to fix the root cause.
>
> Eric
>
>> Eric,
>>
>> I checked some areas in Citrus County FL which still has a lot of bad tiger
>> and noticed many areas where the code did not provide updated nodes and
>> ways, but had major tiger 2010 improvements and no one touching the original
>> OSM ways/nodes, except for a bot. Example location: 28.76355, -82.5346.
>>
>> Your thoughts?
>>
>> Brian
>>





More information about the Imports-us mailing list