[Imports-us] NJ Landuse import (NJ2002LULC)
emacsen at gmail.com
Thu Aug 29 14:57:55 UTC 2013
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Darrell Fuhriman <darrell at garnix.org> wrote:
> Maybe condescending to them some more will convince them to meet the timeline you've laid out for them.
I'm not sure what you mean.
I'm not pushing for any particular timeline.
It seems we have agreement about the problems in the NJ import- so that's good.
What's problematic right now is that we don't have a concrete plan to
address these problems.
I am not interested in "winning" or "losing", but I do want to make
some progress on this situation.
For example, though, I don't think we need to remove
landuse=recreation_ground. I think there also some graveyards or
cemeteries which were imported similarly, and they should probably
stay as well.
What is problematic are the industrial, residential, forest and shrub
objects, epsecially the mega-relations.
And if people are ready to commit to fixing those manually, we can
take a look at doing an event locally to fix it.
In other words, what I would like is some sign that this data is going
to be fixed and curated, and I'm willing to help out. But in the
absence of that, the best thing to do is not have it (since it's so
 I live in NYC and don't have a car, but could travel somewhat. NJ
is tough though, because there's a lot of the state that doesn't have
public transportation, not even buses.
> On Aug 29, 2013, at 2:27, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I haven't heard any news on this. I know this import had its
>> supporters who think it can be salvaged. Are you folks going to
>> provide a plan to address its various issues?
>> - Serge
>> Imports-us mailing list
>> Imports-us at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Imports-us