[Imports-us] [Imports] Durham and Chatham County Address Imports (North Carolina, USA)

James Umbanhowar jumbanho at gmail.com
Sat Jul 21 20:43:08 UTC 2018


Point taken.  In this case, they are the center of property polygons,
so not on buildings, conflated with buildings nor at entrances.  I
don't mind if they are reasonably placed as nodes, but these are not
quite there, yet.

James
On Sat, 2018-07-21 at 15:34 -0400, Nathan Mills wrote:
> To the extent that the address points are not duplicates of existing
> address nodes, unconflated address nodes are a perfectly legitimate
> means of mapping and do not need to be "fixed." Even if the address
> exists on a poly, it's still fine as long as the node is marking
> something meaningful, like the front door of the building. Some have
> in the past gone so far to say that nodes are preferable since it
> allows routers for the differently abled to provide door-to-door
> guidance.
> 
> -Nathan
> 
> 
> On July 21, 2018 2:39:36 PM EDT, James Umbanhowar <jumbanho at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > Sorry, I just saw this.  Please do not upload this, yet.  You have
> > not
> > responded to any of the feedback that I have given.  Instead you
> > have
> > chosen to just upload all the points into the database and then
> > correct
> > the database afterwards.
> > 
> > Please, instead, break this into smaller areas and then conflate
> > the
> > points with existing objects and then upload. From what I can tell,
> > this would be easiest done with the Tasking Manager.
> > 
> > Also, I have already signalled my willingness to help with this
> > task
> > and using the tasking manager would allow me and possibly others to
> > help.
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > 
> > James
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 23:42 -0400, Leif Rasmussen wrote:
> > >  Hi everyone!
> > I have finally verified the license on the Chatham
> > >  County, NC address data which includes about 44,000 address
> > > points. 
> > >  It is public domain except for that it has a "no direct resale"
> > >  policy that allows indirect resale (includes other data), which
> > > is
> > >  compatible with OSM.  Durham County, which uses the ODbL has
> > > also
> > >  produced address data.  I will be completing both the imports
> > > this
> > >  weekend.  Some discussion has taken place about adding buildings
> > > in
> > >  Durham at the same time as the import, but to keep everything
> > > more
> > >  simple, I have decided on just adding nodes for now and then
> > > merging
> > >  with buildings later.  This would reduce complexity and help
> > >  everything run more smoothly.  I will upload all of the data
> > > alone. 
> > >  This helps keep everything more simple, leading to fewer
> > > mistakes.  I
> > >  do not see very much benefit to having several account all
> > > importing
> > >  the data.
> > 
> > Details:
> > Size of both imports combined: 190,000 addresses
> > Date of upload: Saterday and Sunday, 21st and 22nd of July, 2018
> > Type of import:  One time with JOSM in 20 changesets.
> > Account:  LeifRasmussen_import
> > 
> > Wiki pages:
> > Durham County
> > Chatham County
> > 
> > Please let me know of any concerns of ideas!  I would love to
> > improve
> > the import as much as I can.
> > Thanks!
> > Leif Rasmussen
> > 
> > 
> > Imports mailing list
> > Imports at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> 
> 



More information about the Imports-us mailing list