[Imports-us] Geopolitical divisions in Ohio

David Days david.c.days at gmail.com
Tue Feb 25 21:29:00 UTC 2014


It sounds like doing an import of this information wouldn't be a good
fit--something I completely understand.  I was thinking "import" to both
contribute to a worthwhile project and make it easy to use (yes, a bit of
self-interest there), but Serge's comment about mixing my own data has me
looking into setting up a map server for the project, which would suffice.
 I'm guessing that, if there ever were a time when the data would be worth
importing into OSM, having worked with the data in a mapping environment
would have it in better shape for import than trying to push it up early in
the process and living with the results.

Is there anything that comes to mind about the data set that would be
helpful to OSM, now or later?  Proper attribution, following the license
and copyright restrictions, etc are absolutes, but while we're setting up
the software and access, we can always include aspects that would help OSM
in the long run.


On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Carol Kraemer <
> cakraemer at northrivergeographic.com> wrote:
>
>> Serge et al,
>>
>> Has there been discussion yet about creating a list of base layer
>> datasets (imports or survey)  that OSM would encourage contributors to
>> focus on?
>>
>
> Imports are only shortcuts for getting data in that we already would
> collect manually.
>
>
>  Also, creating a list of datasets considered inappropriate for the main
>> map might steer contributors and their communities into a direction that
>> would help reduce some of the friction, especially during the import
>> approval process.
>>
>>
> This would be an exhaustive list, since we can't possibly know every
> dataset that is inapropriate, just as we can't don't have an exhaustive
> list of what is appropriate for OSM, but generally the data we want is
> independantly observable and "generally useful". The "generally useful"
> category is pretty flexible- we have people collecting data on power lines
> and the various utility cabinets on the side of the road, but the
> observable one is pretty hard and fast, which is why we aren't a good map
> for people doing birdspotting, for example.
>
> Political boundaries like land plots and voting districts are similar.
> They're potentially interesting, but they're not something that an OSMer is
> going to be able to improve upon, or observe on the ground.
>
> They're centrally managed and if the government is releasing the data to
> the public (which is how we'd get it in OSM) then OSM is not needed for
> collection either.
>
> - Serge
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports-us/attachments/20140225/32d40d2e/attachment.html>


More information about the Imports-us mailing list