[Imports-us] NJ Landuse import (NJ2002LULC)

Jason Remillard remillard.jason at gmail.com
Wed Aug 21 14:01:43 UTC 2013

Hi Serge,

Would it be possible to re-import the same data later with the
relations straighten out?


On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've been struggling for several months with the NJ2002LULC import .
> This import has a number of very deep problems (which I'll go into)
> but the bottom line is at this point, I'd like to propose to remove
> the import entirely.
> Since this is such a drastic action, I've CCed the author of the
> import, but here are my reasons:
> 1. The import has a number of technical errors
> There are many places where the import is broken, with ways/relations
> that are unclosed, all (or at least a vast majority) of the closed
> ways inside relations are duplicated, etc.
> 2. The import has a large number of "mega-relations"
> This import has many very large, very complex relations. These complex
> relations make the data virtually impossible to work with. I've had so
> many problems trying to fix data that I've ended up just needing to
> take the entire relation away, and I don't think I'm the only one.
> 3. The import is wrong in a number of places
> I don't know if it's because the import is old, but the data is simply
> wrong in many areas.
> 4. I disagree with many areas' subjective data
> One of my bigger frustrations with this import is that I simply
> disagree with some of the classifications, especially "scrub", and
> this is very typical of landuse classifications- they're highly
> subjective.
> 5. The import is not really fixable manually or automatically
> I think that unlike the TIGER work that's being proposed, this import
> is not really fixable. In order to fix it, the relations and their
> component ways would basically need to be reconstructed. The work
> would be huge and so complex I don't think that it would be doable
> without some serious software engineering.
> And to fix the import manually would actually involve more work than
> recreating the data by hand.
> So my proposal is to remove this import entirely.
> Thoughts?
> - Serge
> _______________________________________________
> Imports-us mailing list
> Imports-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us

More information about the Imports-us mailing list